We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Major incidents (MIs) put great demands on the medical response to effectively organize and redistribute resources and personnel, in prehospital care as well as hospital care, and coordinating functions. Studies indicate that regular training and well-established contingency plans are vital for the medical response to MIs. Previous assessments have concluded that Swedish disaster preparedness requires improved organization and coordination. There is currently no method to easily follow-up the preparedness work of the prehospital medical response organizations for MIs in Sweden.
Problem:
The aim of the study was to assess qualifications and training requirements for central individual roles, to examine frequency and focus of training and simulation, as well as to examine current regional routines for MIs in Sweden. The aim was also to identify, to evaluate, and to investigate areas for improvement in prehospital health care preparedness for MIs in Sweden.
Methods:
Descriptive comparative study of Sweden’s prehospital organization, planning, education, and training for MIs through a web-based survey sent to all 21 regions in Sweden. The survey included 64 questions and was based on national legislation and guidelines for preparedness and previous investigations of real MIs.
Results:
A total of 37 answers to the survey were collected representing 17/21 regions (80.9%) from which Regional Management Individuals (RMIs) were selected from 15 regions and used as representative primary responses. The initial routines regarding alarm and establishment of management functions were mainly in-line with national guidelines. Staffing and qualification requirements for certain leadership roles differed substantially between regions. The requirements for the health care staff’s knowledge of the contingency plan were generally low and routines for follow-up were often lacking. The frequency of exercises in certain areas were deficient.
Conclusions:
The results of the study showed several potential areas for improvement within the prehospital emergency medical preparedness for MIs in Sweden. Methodology and adherence of national guidelines for medical response preparedness differ between regions in Sweden, which motivates recurring assessments. It is possible to use a well-prepared questionnaire study to follow-up and to examine parts of the regional prehospital preparedness work and organization for MIs.