Special Considerations for Mass Violence Events in Senior Living Facilities: A Case Report on the Pinelake Health and Rehab Center Shooting

Abstract

a unique case study for examining the specific considerations for mass violence events in senior living facilities. A variety of factors, including reduced sensory perception, reduced mobility, and cognitive decline, may increase the vulnerability of the populations of senior living facilities during mass violence events. Management of response aspects such as evacuation, relocation, and reunification also require special consideration in the context of mass violence at senior living facilities. Better awareness of these vulnerabilities and response considerations can assist facility administrators and emergency managers when preparing for potential mass violence events at senior living facilities. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:150-152)

Rapid response to mass shootings

“…These authors also suggested that these protocols should cover several aspects of rapid response, including how school staff should communicate with one another and to their students if there is an emergency in the school, and how to plan for students who have disability conditions (Selekman & Melvin, ). [Although not a formal school environment, nursing homes and rehabilitation centers have a similar need as a result of the fragility of older persons and the difficulty that will be faced in facilitating evacuation (Martin & Powell, ).] There has also been computer simulated research on what type of “lockdowns” should be implemented in schools.…”

Five Challenges When Managing Mass Casualty or Disaster Situations: A Review Study

“…All 20 papers discussed the use of disaster contingency plans. One challenge of specific interest was balancing following the plan or improvising, both individually and organisationally [10,12,14,21]. In some cases, the plan did not cover the right things, or it was not applicable to the situation because the public did not behave as the plan presumed or the event developed in an unexpected direction [10,21,24].…”

“…One challenge of specific interest was balancing following the plan or improvising, both individually and organisationally [10,12,14,21]. In some cases, the plan did not cover the right things, or it was not applicable to the situation because the public did not behave as the plan presumed or the event developed in an unexpected direction [10,21,24]. One example of this was that spontaneous evacuation-injured people not awaiting prehospital medical care, but leaving the disaster site on their own or with the help of bystanders to go to the hospital-was not mentioned in any plan but occurred in many of the studied events [10,12,15,25,27].…”

“…However, in many of the studied events, most patients needed basic medical care and/or psychosocial support [10,12,25,26]. The patients arriving at the hospital required, not only surgical care, but also internal medicine care [10,21,28]. An unexpected inflow of patients with chronic diseases, due to lack of electricity or medical instruments (e.g., home care ventilators or medications) also occurred [23].…”

“…However, in such instances, due to unexpected factors-such as reduced resources for transports, spontaneous evacuation and security concerns-all patients had to be taken to one hospital [15,22]. This strategy was advantageous because it demanded less transport capacity and, therefore, gave providers the opportunity to provide advanced prehospital medical care; it also enabled the reunion of families and friends, which eased the burden for medical staff [21,22]. During other events, patients with the same types of injures were transferred to the same hospitals, followed by suitable specialists.…”