Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34399863›Full record

ArticlePrehospital and disaster medicine2021

Medical Coordination Rescue Members' and Ambulance Nurses' Perspectives on a New Model for Mass Casualty and Disaster Management and a Novel Terror Attack Mitigation Approach in the Netherlands: A Qualitative Study.

Sivera A A Berben, Lilian C M Vloet, Frans Lischer, Moniek Pieters, Johan de Cock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Examining the experiences of prehospital emergency workers in emergency medical intervention during terrorist attacks: a qualitative study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Concrete silo collapse: emergency medical services response to a mass casualty incident.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

5 authors.

Sivera A A BerbenAssociate Professor, Emergency and Critical Care, Knowledge Center of Sustainable Healthcare, Institute of Nursing Studies, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Research Fellow, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Senior Researcher, Academic Network of Applied Public Health and Emergency Medicine (ANAPHEM), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Lilian C M VloetProfessor, Emergency and Critical Care, Knowledge Center of Sustainable Healthcare, Institute of Nursing Studies, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Research Fellow, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Senior Researcher, Academic Network of Applied Public Health and Emergency Medicine (ANAPHEM), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Frans LischerNetwork Coordinator, Academic Network of Applied Public Health and Emergency Medicine (ANAPHEM), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Moniek PietersDirector of Public Health, Public Health Service Gelderland Zuid, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Johan de CockSenior Researcher, Scientific Coordinator, Academic Network of Applied Public Health and Emergency Medicine (ANAPHEM), Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4453-021X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMass-casualty incidents (MCIs), specifically incidents with chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear agents (CBRN) or terrorist attacks, challenge medical coordination, rescue, availability, and adequate provision of prehospital and hospital-based emergency care. In the Netherlands, a new model for Mass Casualty and Disaster Management (MCDM) along with a Terror Attack Mitigation Approach (TAMA) was introduced in 2016. STUDY

objectiveThe objective of this study was to provide insight in the first experiences of health policy advisors and managers with a medical rescue coordinator and ambulance nursing background regarding the new MCDM and TAMA in order to identify strengths and pitfalls in emergency preparedness and to provide recommendations for improvement.

methodsThe study had a qualitative design and was performed from January 2017 through June 2018. Purposeful sampling was used and the inclusion comprehended health policy advisors and managers with a medical rescue coordinator and ambulance nursing background involved in emergency preparedness. The respondents were interviewed semi-structured and the researchers used a topic list that was based on the literature and content of the newly introduced model and approach. All interviews were typed out verbatim and qualitative content analyzing was used in order to identify relevant themes.

resultsRespondents based their perceptions on large-scale training exercises, as MCDM and TAMA were not yet used during MCIs. Perceived issues of MCDM were the two-tiered triage system, the change in focus from "stay and play" towards "scoop and run," difficulties with new tasks and roles of professionals, and improvement in material provision. Regarding TAMA, all respondents supported the principles (do the most for the most; scoop and run; acceptable personal risk; never walk alone; and standard operational procedure); however, the definitions were lacking clarity while the awareness of optimal personal safety of professionals was absent.As there are currently regional differences in the level of implementation of MCDM and TAMA, this may pose a risk for an optimal inter-regional collaboration.

conclusionThe conclusions refer to experiences of professionals in the Netherlands. Elements of the MCDM and TAMA were highly appreciated and seemed to improve emergency preparedness, while other aspects needed further attention, training, and integration in daily routine. The Netherlands' MCDM model and TAMA will need continuous systematic evaluation based on (inter)national performance criteria in order to underpin the useful and effective elements and to improve the observed pitfalls in emergency preparedness.

Indexed as

Disaster PlanningEmergency Medical ServicesMass Casualty IncidentsNursesAmbulancesHumansNetherlandsCBRNdisaster medicineEMSmass casualtyMIMMSterror

Identifiers

PMID34399863
PMCPMC8459172

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.