Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Disasters and Emergencies – författare

Countering violent extremism consists of various prevention and intervention approaches to increase the resilience of communities and individuals to radicalization toward violent extremism, to provide nonviolent avenues for expressing grievances, and to educate communities about the threat of recruitment and radicalization to violence. To explore the application of health approaches in community-level strategies to countering violent extremism and radicalization, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a public workshop in September 2016. Participants explored the evolving threat of violent extremism and radicalization within communities across America, traditional versus health-centered approaches to countering violent extremism and radicalization, and opportunities for cross-sector and interdisciplinary collaboration and learning among domestic and international stakeholders and organizations. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.

As the United States continues to adapt to a more digital, mobile, and interconnected world, health care and public health professionals have sought to better prepare for and respond to long-standing and emerging threats to the nation''s health security. Health security is the collective effort to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the health consequences of natural, man-made, and technological disasters. Although substantial progress has been made in the past 15 years toward improving health care and public health systems and capacities for health security threats, many complex challenges persist, and often the nation''s preparedness efforts are not sufficient.

On March 8–9, 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine''s Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Disasters and Emergencies hosted a two-day public workshop to acknowledge these persistent issues; to evaluate past, and perhaps inadequate, approaches to addressing them; and to discuss intentional and innovative new solutions. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.

Disasters tend to cross political, jurisdictional, functional, and geographic boundaries. As a result, disasters often require responses from multiple levels of government and multiple organizations in the public and private sectors. This means that public and private organizations that normally operate independently must work together to mount an effective disaster response. To identify and understand approaches to aligning health care system incentives with the American public''s need for a health care system that is prepared to manage acutely ill and injured patients during a disaster, public health emergency, or other mass casualty event, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hosted a 2-day public workshop on March 20 and 21, 2018. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.

California and other wildfire-prone western states have experienced a substantial increase in the number and intensity of wildfires in recent years. Wildlands and climate experts expect these trends to continue and quite likely to worsen in coming years. Wildfires and other disasters can be particularly devastating for vulnerable communities. Members of these communities tend to experience worse health outcomes from disasters, have fewer resources for responding and rebuilding, and receive less assistance from state, local, and federal agencies. Because burning wood releases particulate matter and other toxicants, the health effects of wildfires extend well beyond burns. In addition, deposition of toxicants in soil and water can result in chronic as well as acute exposures.

On June 4-5, 2019, four different entities within the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop titled Implications of the California Wildfires for Health, Communities, and Preparedness at the Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing at the University of California, Davis. The workshop explored the population health, environmental health, emergency preparedness, and health equity consequences of increasingly strong and numerous wildfires, particularly in California. This publication is a summary of the presentations and discussion of the workshop.

In 2009 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) began to assess the need for better-defined medical and public health crisis standards of care (CSC) for catastrophic disasters and public health emergencies. Over the next 10 years, the IOM defined templates for those stakeholders responsible for integrated CSC planning and implementation; created a tool kit with guidance on indicators and triggers; provided a discussion kit for stakeholders to use with their own communities to establish appropriate indicators and triggers to guide their planning; disseminated the messages and key concepts of CSC; and built on the initial efforts to refine certain elements and address remaining gaps. This current Proceedings of a Workshop captures the discussions from a 2019 workshop reviewing the successes and gaps over the last 10 years of CSC work, in order to inform the next phases of planning and implementation.

Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) inform decisions on medical care during a large-scale crisis such as a pandemic or natural disaster, eliminating the need to make these decisions at the bedside without protections or guidance. Numerous points throughout the COVID-19 pandemic have demonstrated the necessity of this type of crisis planning. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Disasters and Emergencies convened a series of public workshops to examine the experiences of healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic and identify lessons that can inform current and future CSC planning and implementation. The workshops examined staffing and workforce needs, planning and implementation of CSC plans, and legal, ethical, and equity considerations of CSC planning. Topics of discussion included improving coordination between the bedside and boardroom, increasing buy-in from elected officials, expanding provider engagement, and addressing health equity issues. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshops.

COVID-19 has proven among the worst public health crises in a generation. Public health emergencies (PHE) have always been anticipated. Despite the growing field of PHE preparedness and planning since the turn of the twenty-first century and the preparedness plans and exercises developed, the U.S. experienced a suboptimal national response to the emergence of COVID-19 in early 2020 compared to other countries.

To explore the U.S. PHE preparedness enterprise, the National Academies Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Disasters and Emergencies convened a workshop in May 2022. They invited participants from government, NGO, and private sector organizations to consider key components, success stories, and failure points in order to identify opportunities for more effective catastrophic disaster, pandemic, and other large scale PHEs planning at the federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial levels. This Proceedings of a Workshop summarizes the discussions held during the workshop.