In reply

Abstract

We thank Dr. Subbarao and colleagues for a thoughtful and thorough commentary regarding our recent review.1Williams J. Nocera M. Casteel C. The effectiveness of disaster training for health care workers: A systematic review.Ann Emerg Med. 2008; 52: 211-222Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (114) Google Scholar We agree that our findings may not be a surprise to the disaster medicine community. Regardless, we hope that the present dialogue continues to highlight the need for rigorous evaluation of disaster training programs.We also appreciate the contemporary perspective that these authors bring to this subject with regard to recent mandates such as HSPD-21.2Homeland Security Presidential Directive -21.http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/bio/resource/documents/hspd-21.pdfGoogle Scholar Although the recent Presidential Directive does not provide specific competencies for disaster response, it does provide a renewed opportunity for experts to come together to establish broad-based competencies for disaster response across a range of medical and public health specialties.Additionally, we acknowledge and applaud the highlighted efforts3Subbarao I. Lyznicki J.M. Hsu E.B. et al.A consensus-based educational framework and competency set for the discipline of disaster medicine and public health preparedness.Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 2008; 2: 57-68Crossref PubMed Scopus (140) Google Scholar to establish an integrated set of competencies for disaster response by health care professionals. Perhaps most importantly, we agree that the incorporation of consensus-approved competency-based programs across medical and public health specialties should provide the opportunity for more rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of disaster training for health care professionals. Rigorous evaluation and published review of the effectiveness of these and other programs, both during training and actual disaster response, is key to establishing the effectiveness of a given training modality. We encourage a broad range of researchers and providers alike to adopt common methodology for developing and evaluating disaster training, with the goal of improving both quality and measurable efficacy of disaster response across healthcare specialties. We thank Dr. Subbarao and colleagues for a thoughtful and thorough commentary regarding our recent review.1Williams J. Nocera M. Casteel C. The effectiveness of disaster training for health care workers: A systematic review.Ann Emerg Med. 2008; 52: 211-222Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (114) Google Scholar We agree that our findings may not be a surprise to the disaster medicine community. Regardless, we hope that the present dialogue continues to highlight the need for rigorous evaluation of disaster training programs. We also appreciate the contemporary perspective that these authors bring to this subject with regard to recent mandates such as HSPD-21.2Homeland Security Presidential Directive -21.http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/bio/resource/documents/hspd-21.pdfGoogle Scholar Although the recent Presidential Directive does not provide specific competencies for disaster response, it does provide a renewed opportunity for experts to come together to establish broad-based competencies for disaster response across a range of medical and public health specialties. Additionally, we acknowledge and applaud the highlighted efforts3Subbarao I. Lyznicki J.M. Hsu E.B. et al.A consensus-based educational framework and competency set for the discipline of disaster medicine and public health preparedness.Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 2008; 2: 57-68Crossref PubMed Scopus (140) Google Scholar to establish an integrated set of competencies for disaster response by health care professionals. Perhaps most importantly, we agree that the incorporation of consensus-approved competency-based programs across medical and public health specialties should provide the opportunity for more rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of disaster training for health care professionals. Rigorous evaluation and published review of the effectiveness of these and other programs, both during training and actual disaster response, is key to establishing the effectiveness of a given training modality. We encourage a broad range of researchers and providers alike to adopt common methodology for developing and evaluating disaster training, with the goal of improving both quality and measurable efficacy of disaster response across healthcare specialties. The Effectiveness of Disaster Training for Health Care Workers: A Systematic ReviewAnnals of Emergency MedicineVol. 52Issue 3PreviewEvidence-based medical literature is lacking about the best methods to train health care providers in disaster response. We systematically review the recent literature to report whether training interventions in disaster preparedness improve knowledge and skills in disaster response. Full-Text PDF Building a Fundamental Framework for Disaster Education and TrainingAnnals of Emergency MedicineVol. 53Issue 6PreviewThe recent article by Williams, Nocera and Casteel sought to determine whether training interventions for health care providers convey the knowledge and skills required for disaster response.1 Due to the lack of sufficient evidence, the study could not conclusively determine whether the training for health care providers is effective. However, the authors did find that the current quality and scope of continuing education for disaster preparedness was largely inconsistent. Full-Text PDF