Responses

Download PDFPDF
Preparation for the next major incident: are we ready? A 12-year update
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Improving Major Incident Preparedness
    • Anand Krishna, Medical Student King's College London
    • Other Contributors:
      • Beenu Madhavan, Consultant Anaesthetist
      • Oliver R McGregor, Medical Student
      • Azazul Choudhury, Medical Student

    Dear Editor,

    We were pleased to read the short report entitled: ‘Preparation for the next major incident: are we ready? A 12-year update’ by Mawhinney et al. (1). We were particularly interested to read the recommendations of the authors for improving knowledge of major incident protocol, as we have recently completed a Quality Improvement (QI) initiative at a central London hospital Emergency Department (ED), aiming to improve knowledge and awareness of major incident protocols.

    We note that in your paper you assessed only doctors at registrar level. While we recognise the value of this approach, we adopted a slightly different methodology, by evaluating a single department but across staff groups; the importance of nurses, porters and security staff would be vital in transitioning to a major incident state.

    We reviewed a trust Emergency Preparedness, Resilience and Response (EPRR) report that demonstrated, although the trust was broadly compliant with major incident guidelines, there was a suggestion training and awareness amongst staff could be improved.

    We conducted a driver analysis to determine possible factors causing low levels of awareness of major incidents and methods of protocol access. This allowed us to optimise our understanding and target our interventions. Following this analysis we conducted baseline data collection and implemented two interventions: a poster campaign directing staff to both hard copies of the major incident...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.