Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34294861›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Evaluating the impact of decontamination interventions performed in sequence for mass casualty chemical incidents.

Samuel Collins, Natalie Williams, Felicity Southworth, Thomas James, Louise Davidson, Emily Orchard, Tim Marczylo, Richard Amlôt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Management of mass casualty incidents: a systematic review and clinical practice guideline update.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The wash-in effect and its significance for mass casualty decontamination.Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2022
    Review
  6. Mass Casualty Decontamination for Chemical Incidents: Research Outcomes and Future Priorities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Samuel CollinsChemicals and Environmental Effects Department, Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Public Health England, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK. Samuel.collins@phe.gov.uk.
Natalie WilliamsBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science and Technology, Health Protection Directorate, Public Health England, Porton Down, UK.
Felicity SouthworthBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science and Technology, Health Protection Directorate, Public Health England, Porton Down, UK.
Thomas JamesChemicals and Environmental Effects Department, Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Public Health England, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK.
Louise DavidsonBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science and Technology, Health Protection Directorate, Public Health England, Porton Down, UK.
Emily OrchardBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science and Technology, Health Protection Directorate, Public Health England, Porton Down, UK.
Tim MarczyloToxicology Department, Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Public Health England, Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK.
Richard AmlôtBehavioural Science Team, Emergency Response Department Science and Technology, Health Protection Directorate, Public Health England, Porton Down, UK.
Public Health England · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health PR-ST-1015-10016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Initial Operational Response (IOR) to chemical incidents is a suite of rapid strategies including evacuation, disrobe and improvised and interim decontamination. IOR and Specialist Operational Response (SOR) decontamination protocols involving mass decontamination units would be conducted in sequence by UK emergency services following a chemical incident, to allow for safe onward transfer of casualties. As part of a series of human volunteer studies, we examined for the first time, the effectiveness of UK IOR and SOR decontamination procedures alone and in sequence. Specifically, we evaluated the additional contribution of SOR, when following improvised and interim decontamination. Two simulants, methyl salicylate (MeS) with vegetable oil and benzyl salicylate (BeS), were applied to participants' skin. Participants underwent improvised dry, improvised wet, interim wet, specialist decontamination and a no decontamination control. Skin analysis and UV photography indicated significantly lower levels of both simulants remaining following decontamination compared to controls. There were no significant differences in MeS levels recovered between decontamination conditions. Analysis of BeS, a more persistent simulant than MeS, showed that recovery from skin was significantly reduced following combined IOR with SOR than IOR alone. These results show modest additional benefits of decontamination interventions conducted in sequence, particularly for persistent chemicals, supporting current UK operational procedures.

Identifiers

PMID34294861
PMCPMC8298482
OpenAlexW3148865075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.