Rapid Health and Needs assessments after disasters: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Publichealth care providers, stakeholders and policy makers request a rapid insight into health status and needs of the affected population after disasters. To our knowledge, there is no standardized rapid assessment tool for Europea...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yzermans CJ (Author), van Bokhoven Irene (Author), Korteweg Helena A (Author), Grievink Linda (Author)
Format: Book
Published: BMC, 2010-06-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_0f7f6427d7a7450d94fdf6f50d36a3e6
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Yzermans CJ  |e author 
700 1 0 |a van Bokhoven Irene  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Korteweg Helena A  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Grievink Linda  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Rapid Health and Needs assessments after disasters: a systematic review 
260 |b BMC,   |c 2010-06-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 10.1186/1471-2458-10-295 
500 |a 1471-2458 
520 |a <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Publichealth care providers, stakeholders and policy makers request a rapid insight into health status and needs of the affected population after disasters. To our knowledge, there is no standardized rapid assessment tool for European countries. The aim of this article is to describe existing tools used internationally and analyze them for the development of a workable rapid assessment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A review was conducted, including original studies concerning a rapid health and/or needs assessment. The studies used were published between 1980 and 2009. The electronic databasesof Medline, Embase, SciSearch and Psychinfo were used.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty-three studies were included for this review. The majority of the studies was of US origin and in most cases related to natural disasters, especially concerning the weather. In eighteen studies an assessment was conducted using a structured questionnaire, eleven studies used registries and four used both methods. Questionnaires were primarily used to asses the health needs, while data records were used to assess the health status of disaster victims.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Methods most commonly used were face to face interviews and data extracted from existing registries. Ideally, a rapid assessment tool is needed which does not add to the burden of disaster victims. In this perspective, the use of existing medical registries in combination with a brief questionnaire in the aftermath of disasters is the most promising. Since there is an increasing need for such a tool this approach needs further examination.</p> 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Public aspects of medicine 
690 |a RA1-1270 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n BMC Public Health, Vol 10, Iss 1, p 295 (2010) 
787 0 |n http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/295 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/0f7f6427d7a7450d94fdf6f50d36a3e6  |z Connect to this object online.