Background
Internal hospital crises and disasters (IHCDs) are events that disrupt the routine functioning of a hospital while threatening the well-being of patients and staff. IHCDs may cause hospital closure, evacuations of patients and loss of healthcare capacity. The consequences may be ruinous for local communities. Although IHCDs occur with regularity, information on the frequency and types of these events is scarcely published in the medical literature. However, gray literature and popular media reports are widely available. We therefore conducted a scoping review of these literature sources to identify and characterize the IHCDs that occurred in Dutch hospitals from 2000 to 2020. The aim is to develop a systematic understanding of the frequency of the various types of IHCDs occurring in a prosperous nation such as the Netherlands.
Methods
A systematic scoping review of news articles retrieved from the LexisNexis database, Google, Google News, PubMed and EMBASE between 2000 and 2020. All articles mentioning the closure of a hospital department in the Netherlands were analyzed.
Results
A total of 134 IHCDs were identified in a 20-year time period. Of these IHCDs, there were 96 (71.6%) emergency department closures, 76 (56.7%) operation room closures, 56 (41.8%) evacuations, 26 (17.9%) reports of injured persons, and 2 (1.5%) reported casualties. Cascading events of multiple failures transpired in 39 (29.1%) IHCDs. The primary causes of IHCDs (as reported) were information and communication technology (ICT) failures, technical failures, fires, power failures, and hazardous material warnings. An average of 6.7 IHCDs occurred per year. From 2000–2009 there were 32 IHCDs, of which one concerned a primary ICT failure. Of the 102 IHCDs between 2010–2019, 32 were primary ICT failures.
Conclusions
IHCDs occur with some regularity in the Netherlands and have marked effects on hospital critical care departments, particularly emergency departments. Cascading events of multiple failures transpire nearly a third of the time, limiting the ability of a hospital to stave off closure due to failure. Emergency managers should therefore prioritize the risk of ICT failures and cascading events and train hospital staff accordingly.
CPET provided the only means in this study of predicting both 30-day outcome and 30-month mortality. CPET could therefore become an increasingly important tool in determining the optimum management for AAA patients.
Background: Annually 16,000 appendectomies are performed in the Netherlands, of which 15-20% are negative. In 2010, to reduce this unacceptable percentage of superfluous appendectomies, the Dutch Association for Surgery introduced the ‘Appendicitis Guideline'. This guideline recommends the use of imaging. In this observational prospective study the added value of imaging in everyday clinical practice is evaluated. Methods: All patients with suspected appendicitis were included at the emergency department of a Dutch teaching hospital during the period from September 2011 to May 2012 (n = 350; 237 adults and 113 children under 18 years). Adherence to the guideline was evaluated. Results: 75 Patients (21%) were not referred for imaging because of a low suspicion or alternative diagnosis. In 16 patients (5%) the guideline was not followed. Of the 259 patients (74%) who underwent ultrasonography, 105 (30%) also underwent computed tomography (CT). 127 appendectomies were performed, showing appendicitis in 112 patients (88%); 15 appendectomies (12%) were negative. In the latter group, 12 were performed after false positive imaging results, and 3 following inconclusive imaging results. Conclusion: When using imaging in the diagnosis of appendicitis, the percentage of negative appendectomies remains close to the percentage declared as unacceptable by the publishers of the guideline.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.