BackgroundDuring a multiple-casualty incident, a large casualty caseload adversely affects the quality of care given to patients. From a trauma care perspective, the goal of the hospital emergency department plan is to simultaneously provide severely injured patients with a standard of care that approximates the care given to similar patients under normal conditions. This study highlights the barriers and challenges associated with implementing the emergency plans at the Nasser Medical Complex, Gaza Strip, occupied Palestinian territory, during a multiple-casualty incident, with the aim of facilitating appropriate staff training to address any deficiencies identified. MethodsA self-administered 70-item questionnaire reflecting the local major incident protocol (the Multiple Casualty Management System) was designed by the authors for completion by health-care staff. The questionnaire was divided into eight sections to assess knowledge and awareness and to specify deficiencies. Answers were analysed as frequencies and percentage points in terms of guideline adherence. Descriptive analysis were done on SPSS version 23. Findings70 questionnaires were completed by trauma team members (25 emergency doctors, 25 nurses, 15 surgeons, and five intensive care clinicians). The concepts of mass casualty and triage according to risk were understood by 40 (57%) of 70 participants, with most (65 ;93%) believing that the task of triage was to provide maximum care for the largest number of potential survivors. Only 50 (71%) reported competency in basic emergency skills like direct-current shock, chest tube insertion, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, nasogastric tube, and intravenous catheter insertion. Although 49 (70%) participants found the triage system very important, only 40 (57%) were able to apply it correctly. The biggest challenge was public acceptance of the concept of triage; only 5 (7%) participants believed that patients and relatives would accept a less urgent category. Furthermore, only 11 (16%) participants found that resources and equipment were adequate in case of mass casualty. Communication within the team was another struggle, with 45 participants were considering it unsatisfactory. However, 13 (19%) participants believed that the post-accident strategies with assessment plan to detect positive and negative points and clinical finding after the incident were satisfactory. Participants found the most important obstacles to efficient implementation of the emergency plan to be overcrowding in emergency department (63 [90%]), poor knowledge of the public regarding the importance of hospital triaging (59 [84%]), shortage of medical staff (57 [81%]), scarcity of resources (52 [74%]), ineffective security (52 [74%]), and insufficient staff training (41 [59%]). We also noticed that nearly all the emergency doctors were general practitioners without any specialised training. An emergency residency programme was started after the conclusion of this study, but results on the effects on multiple-casualty incident management are not yet available. InterpretationThis small study identified areas of weakness in the Multiple Casualty Management System, some due to poor resources and others to poor communication within the team or with the public. One important factor identified was the unawareness of the public of the importance of effective triage in this situation. Therefore, these areas should be addressed by staff feedback and training and by public awareness campaigns on the avoidance of overcrowding, the importance of non-threatening behaviour, and the purpose of triage in emergency department. Such interventions might also lead to improvement in day-to-day work at the emergency department, even outside the context of mass incidents. FundingNone.