The University of Kentucky Hospital

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Disaster procedures for staff members
Alternative clinic sites
Toxic external atmosphere
Bomb threats
Emergency evacuation
References

Disaster procedures for staff members

The University of Kentucky Hospital has a plan aims at providing an organized process of initiating, managing and recovering from emergencies that could occur within and outside the hospital, which could negatively impact the healthcare organization and the surrounding community.

After a terrorist attack, the personnel within the hospital should follow standard disaster procedures so that they can be safe and help other people who could be patients within the hospital or their colleagues. In fact, the emergency plan of the hospital asserts that all personnel of the health facility are important in conducting operations of the facility after a disaster occurs. It is essential for staff to know that a disaster has occurred and that they have crucial roles in helping other people to be safe (Gigerenzer, 2006).

Thus, personnel need to identify the exact place where a disaster occurs in the facility. This would help in knowing the direction to follow and direct other people to follow. Thereafter, the staff should identify those in need of urgent healthcare and take them to the emergency department so that they can be offered care.

However, when personnel are transporting the injured persons to the emergency department, they should also be offering first aid services. The personnel could get involved in procedures that should be used to support single emergency responses that can have a negative impact on the availability of healthcare services, and multiple emergency responses that can happen concurrently.

The disaster procedures are coordinated by various disaster management specialists who should use the best communication approaches in order to pass messages to the staff and injured persons. However, some additional roles may be assigned to personnel by their seniors based on the urgent needs of the hospital. All a time of a disaster, all medical staff are supposed to wear their identification badges for easier coordination of disaster response activities.

Alternative clinic sites

The University of Kentucky Hospital has a specific alternative clinic site that should be used when the normal hospital environment cannot support quality patient care outcomes. Research shows that the alternative clinic sites are important in the provision of urgent care to victims of disasters (Gigerenzer, 2006). Within the University of Kentucky Hospital, an alternative clinic site involves the participation of medical personnel on duty at the time of a disaster within the hospital facility.

The facility is characterized by three main buildings that are separated by permanent walls and supplied with power by independent generators. Thus, if one building is affected by a disaster, then one of the other two buildings could be used by healthcare providers to offer care to patients. The plan indicates that communication between the main hospital and alternative clinic sites should be controlled by the disaster response team.

Toxic external atmosphere

Terrorist attacks could involve the release of toxic substances into the atmosphere, which could negatively impact the health of the persons near in the surroundings (Mueller & Stewart, 2012). It has been shown that toxic air pollutants cause some cancers and other severe health conditions like birth defects.

However, the concentrations of air toxicants must be sufficient to cause health effects. The emergency disaster plan adopted by the University of Kentucky Hospital outlines the measures that should be taken to avoid the health effects caused by poisonous substances released into the atmosphere. For example, healthcare providers should utilize special masks that filter air that could be contaminated (Mueller & Stewart, 2012).

Bomb threats

The University of Kentucky Hospital estimates that bombs have a 0.78 probability of causing harm within the facility. Bombs are common in terrorist attacks (Huddy & Feldman, 2011).

Bombs cause great harm to human beings and they destroy property such as buildings. The threat of bombs following a terrorist attack is of great concern because attackers could explode bombs after people respond to an attack. In fact, terrorist attackers explode bombs after people visit scenes of attacks so that they can attack more people. This could cause great harm to persons because they are caught unaware.

The emergency response plan of the University of Kentucky Hospital contains comprehensive procedures that should be followed to prevent damages that could be caused by bomb threats after a terrorist attack. For example, people with the knowledge to detonate bombs should visit a scene characterized by a terrorist attack so that they can identify and destroy bombs that could explode shortly after many people visit the site of an attack (Huddy & Feldman, 2011).

Emergency evacuation

The University of Kentucky Hospital recommends that people should leave a terrorist attack scene as soon as possible so that they cannot suffer from more harm in case attackers continue attacking people through the use of various mechanical and/or chemical weapons. The evacuation process should be coordinated so that people cannot suffer more harm as they try to leave the scene of an attack.

They should use exits that are safe and wide to allow free movement of people. In fact, it has been demonstrated that people running away from a terrorist attack site are injured as they struggle to leave the site through narrow exits (Gigerenzer, 2006; Huddy & Feldman, 2011).

However, the hospital is designed using wide exits that could be used in times of emergencies such as terrorist attacks. Thus, the plan contains the guidelines that should be followed, which are clear about communications that should be used to direct people through safe exits.

References

Gigerenzer, G. (2006). Out of the frying pan into the fire: Behavioral reactions to terrorist attacks. Risk analysis, 26(2), 347-351.

Huddy, L., & Feldman, S. (2011). Americans respond politically to 9/11: understanding the impact of the terrorist attacks and their aftermath. American Psychologist, 66(6), 455.

Mueller, J., & Stewart, M. G. (2012). The terrorism delusion: America’s overwrought response to September 11. International Security, 37(1), 81-110.

Click Here To Order Now!