Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T05:39:50.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Volendam Fire: Lessons Learned from Disaster Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Sabine M.van Harten*
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Zaans Medical Center, Zaandam, the Netherlands
Joost J.L.M. Bierens
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Lieke Welling
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Peter Patka
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Robert W. Kreis
Affiliation:
Burns Centre, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands
Maarten Boers
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
*
Zaans Medical Center Department of Surgery Koningin Julianaplein 581502 DV Zaandam The Netherlands E-mail: svanharten@hotmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction:

After the Volendam fire, a multidisciplinary, integral evaluation, called the Medical Evaluation of the Disaster in Volendam (MERV), was established. This article is a discussion of disaster research methodology. It describes the organizational framework of this project and the methodological problems.

Methods:

A scientific steering group consisting of members from three hospitals prepared and guided the project. A research team wrote the final study protocol and performed the study. The project was funded by the Ministry of Health. The study protocol had a modular design in which each of the modules focused on one specific area or location. The main questions for each location were: (1) which treatment protocols were used; (2)what was the condition of the patient; and (3) was medical care provided according to existing protocols. After the fire, 241 victims were treated in hospitals; they all were included in the study. Most of the victims had burn injuries, and approximately one-third suffered from inhalation injury. All hospitals and ambulance services involved were visited in order to collect data, and interviewers obtained additional information. The government helped obtain permission for data-collection in three of the hospitals. Over 1,200 items of information about each patient and >200,000 total items were collected. During data processing, the data were re-organized, categorized, and presented in a uniform and consistent style. A cross-sectional site analysis and a longitudinal patient analysis were conducted. This was facilitated by the use of several sub-data-bases. The modular approach made it possible to obtain a complete overview of the medical care provided. The project team was guided by a multidisciplinary steering group and the research was performed by a research team. This enabled the research team to focus on the scientific aspects.

Conclusion:

The evaluation of the Volendam fire indicates that a project approach with a modular design is effective for the analysis of complex incidents. The use of several sub-databases makes it easy to combine findings and conduct cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. The government played an important role in the funding and support of the project. To limit and structure data collection and analysis, a pilot study based on several predefined main questions should be conducted. The questions then can be specified further based on the availability of data.

Type
Original Research
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2006

References

1.Sundnes, KO, Birnbaum, ML (eds): Health Disaster Management Guidelines for Evaluation and Research in the Utstein Style. Prehosp Disast Med 2003;17(3):Supplement.Google Scholar
2.Ricci, E, Pretto, E: Assessment of prehospital and hospital resonse in disaster. Crit Care Clin 1991;7:471484.Google Scholar
3.Quick, G: A paradigm for multidisciplinary disaster research: The Oklahoma City experience. J Emer Med 1998;16:621630.Google Scholar
4. Commissie Onderzoek Cafébrand Nieuwjaarsnacht (Commissie Alders): Cafebrand Nieuwjaarsnacht Eindrapport. Deen Haag, 2001.Google Scholar
5. Australia and New Zealand Burn Association: Emergency Management of Severe Burns (EMSB) Course Manual. NL versie 01/09 edn. 1996.Google Scholar
6. Stuurgroep Medische Evaluatie Ramp Volendam: Medish Rapport Cafébrand Volendam 2001. 2003.Google Scholar
7. Stuurgroep Medische Evaluatie Ramp Volendam: Medish Rapport Cafébrand Volendam 2001 (Fase 2). 2004.Google Scholar
8.Welling, L, van Harten, SM, Patka, P et al. : The cafe fire on New Year's Eve in Volendam, the Netherlands: Description of events.Burns 2005;31:548554.Google Scholar
9.Welling, L, van Harten, SM, Patka, P et al. : Medical management after indoor fires: A review. Burns 2005;31:673678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.van Harten, SM, Welling, L, Perez, SGM et al. : Management ofmultiple burn casualties from the Volendam disaster in the emergency departmens of general hospitals. Eur J Emerg Med 2005;12(6):270274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Welling, L, Perez, SGM, van Harten, SM et al. : Analyis of the pre-event education and subsequent performance of emergency medical responders to the Volendam cafe fire. Eur J Emerg Med 2005;12(6):265269.Google Scholar
12.Lillibridge, SR, Noji, EK: The importance of medical records in disaster epidemiology research. J AHIMA 1992;63:137138.Google ScholarPubMed