Hospital Disaster Response Using Business Impact Analysis
The catastrophic Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 created a crisis in a university-affiliated hospital by disrupting the water supply for 10 days. In response, this study was conducted to analyze water use and prioritize water consumption in each department of the hospital by applying a business...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Prehospital and disaster medicine 2014-12, Vol.29 (6), p.561-568 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 568 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 561 |
container_title | Prehospital and disaster medicine |
container_volume | 29 |
creator | Suginaka, Hiroshi Okamoto, Ken Hirano, Yohei Fukumoto, Yuichi Morikawa, Miki Oode, Yasumasa Sumi, Yuka Inoue, Yoshiaki Matsuda, Shigeru Tanaka, Hiroshi |
description | The catastrophic Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 created a crisis in a university-affiliated hospital by disrupting the water supply for 10 days. In response, this study was conducted to analyze water use and prioritize water consumption in each department of the hospital by applying a business impact analysis (BIA). Identifying the minimum amount of water necessary for continuing operations during a disaster was an additional goal.
Water is essential for many hospital operations and disaster-ready policies must be in place for the safety and continued care of patients.
A team of doctors, nurses, and office workers in the hospital devised a BIA questionnaire to examine all operations using water. The questionnaire included department name, operation name, suggested substitutes for water, and the estimated daily amount of water consumption. Operations were placed in one of three ranks (S, A, or B) depending on the impact on patients and the need for operational continuity. Recovery time objective (RTO), which is equivalent to the maximum tolerable period of disruption, was determined. Furthermore, the actual use of water and the efficiency of substitute methods, practiced during the water-disrupted periods, were verified in each operation.
There were 24 activities using water in eight departments, and the estimated water consumption in the hospital was 326 (SD = 17) m³ per day: 64 (SD = 3) m³ for S (20%), 167 (SD = 8) m³ for A (51%), and 95 (SD = 5) m³ for B operations (29%). During the disruption, the hospital had about 520 m³ of available water. When the RTO was set to four days, the amount of water available would have been 130 m³ per day. During the crisis, 81% of the substitute methods were used for the S and A operations.
This is the first study to identify and prioritize hospital operations necessary for the efficient continuation of medical treatment during suspension of the water supply by applying a BIA. Understanding the priority of operations and the minimum daily water requirement for each operation is important for a hospital in the event of an unexpected adverse situation, such as a major disaster. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S1049023X14001022 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1639974541</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1049023X14001022</cupid><sourcerecordid>1639974541</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-c1ac9428a9c0bbbead7c0b4bd6fb9f3c59a4f1c694a2a09887abd438032c75be3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1Lw0AQxRdRbK3-AV4k4MVLdPYj2eyx1o8WCoJa8BZ2N5uSkjQxkxz637u1VUTx9B7Mb94Mj5BzCtcUqLx5oSAUMP5GBQAFxg7IkCoRhVTx5NB7Pw638wE5QVwBMBWx-JgMmBcFUg6JmtbYFJ0ug7sCNXauDZ4dNvUaXbDAYr0MbnsvDjGYVY22XTBe63KDBZ6So1yX6M72OiKLh_vXyTScPz3OJuN5aAWNu9BSbZVgiVYWjDFOZ9IbYbI4NyrnNlJa5NTGSmimQSWJ1CYTPAHOrIyM4yNytctt2vq9d9ilVYHWlaVeu7rHlMZcKSkiQT16-Qtd1X3r__2kJEASQeQpuqNsWyO2Lk-btqh0u0kppNte0z-9-p2LfXJvKpd9b3wV6QG-D9WVaYts6X7c_jf2A_KVgV8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1637008505</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hospital Disaster Response Using Business Impact Analysis</title><source>Cambridge Journals Online</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Suginaka, Hiroshi ; Okamoto, Ken ; Hirano, Yohei ; Fukumoto, Yuichi ; Morikawa, Miki ; Oode, Yasumasa ; Sumi, Yuka ; Inoue, Yoshiaki ; Matsuda, Shigeru ; Tanaka, Hiroshi</creator><creatorcontrib>Suginaka, Hiroshi ; Okamoto, Ken ; Hirano, Yohei ; Fukumoto, Yuichi ; Morikawa, Miki ; Oode, Yasumasa ; Sumi, Yuka ; Inoue, Yoshiaki ; Matsuda, Shigeru ; Tanaka, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><description>The catastrophic Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 created a crisis in a university-affiliated hospital by disrupting the water supply for 10 days. In response, this study was conducted to analyze water use and prioritize water consumption in each department of the hospital by applying a business impact analysis (BIA). Identifying the minimum amount of water necessary for continuing operations during a disaster was an additional goal.
Water is essential for many hospital operations and disaster-ready policies must be in place for the safety and continued care of patients.
A team of doctors, nurses, and office workers in the hospital devised a BIA questionnaire to examine all operations using water. The questionnaire included department name, operation name, suggested substitutes for water, and the estimated daily amount of water consumption. Operations were placed in one of three ranks (S, A, or B) depending on the impact on patients and the need for operational continuity. Recovery time objective (RTO), which is equivalent to the maximum tolerable period of disruption, was determined. Furthermore, the actual use of water and the efficiency of substitute methods, practiced during the water-disrupted periods, were verified in each operation.
There were 24 activities using water in eight departments, and the estimated water consumption in the hospital was 326 (SD = 17) m³ per day: 64 (SD = 3) m³ for S (20%), 167 (SD = 8) m³ for A (51%), and 95 (SD = 5) m³ for B operations (29%). During the disruption, the hospital had about 520 m³ of available water. When the RTO was set to four days, the amount of water available would have been 130 m³ per day. During the crisis, 81% of the substitute methods were used for the S and A operations.
This is the first study to identify and prioritize hospital operations necessary for the efficient continuation of medical treatment during suspension of the water supply by applying a BIA. Understanding the priority of operations and the minimum daily water requirement for each operation is important for a hospital in the event of an unexpected adverse situation, such as a major disaster.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1049-023X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1945-1938</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1049023X14001022</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25269077</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Disaster management ; Disaster Planning ; Disasters ; Earthquakes ; Emergency preparedness ; Health technology assessment ; Hospitals, University - organization & administration ; Humans ; Impact analysis ; Japan ; Medical personnel ; Medical treatment ; Original Research ; Seismic activity ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Water consumption ; Water content ; Water Supply ; Water use</subject><ispartof>Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2014-12, Vol.29 (6), p.561-568</ispartof><rights>Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-c1ac9428a9c0bbbead7c0b4bd6fb9f3c59a4f1c694a2a09887abd438032c75be3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-c1ac9428a9c0bbbead7c0b4bd6fb9f3c59a4f1c694a2a09887abd438032c75be3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1049023X14001022/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27923,27924,55627</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25269077$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Suginaka, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Okamoto, Ken</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hirano, Yohei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fukumoto, Yuichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morikawa, Miki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oode, Yasumasa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sumi, Yuka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inoue, Yoshiaki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsuda, Shigeru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanaka, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><title>Hospital Disaster Response Using Business Impact Analysis</title><title>Prehospital and disaster medicine</title><addtitle>Prehosp. Disaster med</addtitle><description>The catastrophic Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 created a crisis in a university-affiliated hospital by disrupting the water supply for 10 days. In response, this study was conducted to analyze water use and prioritize water consumption in each department of the hospital by applying a business impact analysis (BIA). Identifying the minimum amount of water necessary for continuing operations during a disaster was an additional goal.
Water is essential for many hospital operations and disaster-ready policies must be in place for the safety and continued care of patients.
A team of doctors, nurses, and office workers in the hospital devised a BIA questionnaire to examine all operations using water. The questionnaire included department name, operation name, suggested substitutes for water, and the estimated daily amount of water consumption. Operations were placed in one of three ranks (S, A, or B) depending on the impact on patients and the need for operational continuity. Recovery time objective (RTO), which is equivalent to the maximum tolerable period of disruption, was determined. Furthermore, the actual use of water and the efficiency of substitute methods, practiced during the water-disrupted periods, were verified in each operation.
There were 24 activities using water in eight departments, and the estimated water consumption in the hospital was 326 (SD = 17) m³ per day: 64 (SD = 3) m³ for S (20%), 167 (SD = 8) m³ for A (51%), and 95 (SD = 5) m³ for B operations (29%). During the disruption, the hospital had about 520 m³ of available water. When the RTO was set to four days, the amount of water available would have been 130 m³ per day. During the crisis, 81% of the substitute methods were used for the S and A operations.
This is the first study to identify and prioritize hospital operations necessary for the efficient continuation of medical treatment during suspension of the water supply by applying a BIA. Understanding the priority of operations and the minimum daily water requirement for each operation is important for a hospital in the event of an unexpected adverse situation, such as a major disaster.</description><subject>Disaster management</subject><subject>Disaster Planning</subject><subject>Disasters</subject><subject>Earthquakes</subject><subject>Emergency preparedness</subject><subject>Health technology assessment</subject><subject>Hospitals, University - organization & administration</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Japan</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medical treatment</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Seismic activity</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Water consumption</subject><subject>Water content</subject><subject>Water Supply</subject><subject>Water use</subject><issn>1049-023X</issn><issn>1945-1938</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1Lw0AQxRdRbK3-AV4k4MVLdPYj2eyx1o8WCoJa8BZ2N5uSkjQxkxz637u1VUTx9B7Mb94Mj5BzCtcUqLx5oSAUMP5GBQAFxg7IkCoRhVTx5NB7Pw638wE5QVwBMBWx-JgMmBcFUg6JmtbYFJ0ug7sCNXauDZ4dNvUaXbDAYr0MbnsvDjGYVY22XTBe63KDBZ6So1yX6M72OiKLh_vXyTScPz3OJuN5aAWNu9BSbZVgiVYWjDFOZ9IbYbI4NyrnNlJa5NTGSmimQSWJ1CYTPAHOrIyM4yNytctt2vq9d9ilVYHWlaVeu7rHlMZcKSkiQT16-Qtd1X3r__2kJEASQeQpuqNsWyO2Lk-btqh0u0kppNte0z-9-p2LfXJvKpd9b3wV6QG-D9WVaYts6X7c_jf2A_KVgV8</recordid><startdate>20141201</startdate><enddate>20141201</enddate><creator>Suginaka, Hiroshi</creator><creator>Okamoto, Ken</creator><creator>Hirano, Yohei</creator><creator>Fukumoto, Yuichi</creator><creator>Morikawa, Miki</creator><creator>Oode, Yasumasa</creator><creator>Sumi, Yuka</creator><creator>Inoue, Yoshiaki</creator><creator>Matsuda, Shigeru</creator><creator>Tanaka, Hiroshi</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Jems Publishing Company, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141201</creationdate><title>Hospital Disaster Response Using Business Impact Analysis</title><author>Suginaka, Hiroshi ; Okamoto, Ken ; Hirano, Yohei ; Fukumoto, Yuichi ; Morikawa, Miki ; Oode, Yasumasa ; Sumi, Yuka ; Inoue, Yoshiaki ; Matsuda, Shigeru ; Tanaka, Hiroshi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c416t-c1ac9428a9c0bbbead7c0b4bd6fb9f3c59a4f1c694a2a09887abd438032c75be3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Disaster management</topic><topic>Disaster Planning</topic><topic>Disasters</topic><topic>Earthquakes</topic><topic>Emergency preparedness</topic><topic>Health technology assessment</topic><topic>Hospitals, University - organization & administration</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Japan</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medical treatment</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Seismic activity</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Water consumption</topic><topic>Water content</topic><topic>Water Supply</topic><topic>Water use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Suginaka, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Okamoto, Ken</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hirano, Yohei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fukumoto, Yuichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morikawa, Miki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oode, Yasumasa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sumi, Yuka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inoue, Yoshiaki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsuda, Shigeru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanaka, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health Management Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Prehospital and disaster medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Suginaka, Hiroshi</au><au>Okamoto, Ken</au><au>Hirano, Yohei</au><au>Fukumoto, Yuichi</au><au>Morikawa, Miki</au><au>Oode, Yasumasa</au><au>Sumi, Yuka</au><au>Inoue, Yoshiaki</au><au>Matsuda, Shigeru</au><au>Tanaka, Hiroshi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hospital Disaster Response Using Business Impact Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Prehospital and disaster medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Prehosp. Disaster med</addtitle><date>2014-12-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>561</spage><epage>568</epage><pages>561-568</pages><issn>1049-023X</issn><eissn>1945-1938</eissn><abstract>The catastrophic Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 created a crisis in a university-affiliated hospital by disrupting the water supply for 10 days. In response, this study was conducted to analyze water use and prioritize water consumption in each department of the hospital by applying a business impact analysis (BIA). Identifying the minimum amount of water necessary for continuing operations during a disaster was an additional goal.
Water is essential for many hospital operations and disaster-ready policies must be in place for the safety and continued care of patients.
A team of doctors, nurses, and office workers in the hospital devised a BIA questionnaire to examine all operations using water. The questionnaire included department name, operation name, suggested substitutes for water, and the estimated daily amount of water consumption. Operations were placed in one of three ranks (S, A, or B) depending on the impact on patients and the need for operational continuity. Recovery time objective (RTO), which is equivalent to the maximum tolerable period of disruption, was determined. Furthermore, the actual use of water and the efficiency of substitute methods, practiced during the water-disrupted periods, were verified in each operation.
There were 24 activities using water in eight departments, and the estimated water consumption in the hospital was 326 (SD = 17) m³ per day: 64 (SD = 3) m³ for S (20%), 167 (SD = 8) m³ for A (51%), and 95 (SD = 5) m³ for B operations (29%). During the disruption, the hospital had about 520 m³ of available water. When the RTO was set to four days, the amount of water available would have been 130 m³ per day. During the crisis, 81% of the substitute methods were used for the S and A operations.
This is the first study to identify and prioritize hospital operations necessary for the efficient continuation of medical treatment during suspension of the water supply by applying a BIA. Understanding the priority of operations and the minimum daily water requirement for each operation is important for a hospital in the event of an unexpected adverse situation, such as a major disaster.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>25269077</pmid><doi>10.1017/S1049023X14001022</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1049-023X |
ispartof | Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2014-12, Vol.29 (6), p.561-568 |
issn | 1049-023X 1945-1938 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1639974541 |
source | Cambridge Journals Online; MEDLINE |
subjects | Disaster management Disaster Planning Disasters Earthquakes Emergency preparedness Health technology assessment Hospitals, University - organization & administration Humans Impact analysis Japan Medical personnel Medical treatment Original Research Seismic activity Surveys and Questionnaires Water consumption Water content Water Supply Water use |
title | Hospital Disaster Response Using Business Impact Analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T15%3A21%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hospital%20Disaster%20Response%20Using%20Business%20Impact%20Analysis&rft.jtitle=Prehospital%20and%20disaster%20medicine&rft.au=Suginaka,%20Hiroshi&rft.date=2014-12-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=561&rft.epage=568&rft.pages=561-568&rft.issn=1049-023X&rft.eissn=1945-1938&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1049023X14001022&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1639974541%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1637008505&rft_id=info:pmid/25269077&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1049023X14001022&rfr_iscdi=true |