使用災難演習評估之功效

A Study on Disaster Exercise Evaluation

紀志賢(Chih-Hsien Chi) ； 林宏榮(Hung-Jung Lin) ； 陳文超(Wen-Chao Chen) ； 蔡明哲(Ming-Che Tsai) ； 林淑敏(Shu-Min Lin)

《中華民國急診醫學會醫誌》 4卷4期 (2002/12) Pp. 165-174

摘要

背景：目前我國缺乏災難演習評估的制度，往往無法藉由演習，經過評估，作為系統改進的依據及參考。
方法：以九十年度南部某機場航機失事大量傷患救護軍民聯合演練為對象。評估人員由參予演習之各單位推選。利用外國資料，作為此次演習評估的檢查表的依據。檢查表共分十大項目，每一項目再分細項，依實際觀察之結果大致分為：做到、沒做到、無法評估／無法觀察等部分。
結果：依據希望評估的項目中，分析可以作到、無法做到以及無法評估的比例。以本次演習為例，警報通知以通訊評估結果有百分之七十以上可以達到標準。另一方面，個人與家之協助與撤離、損害評估、以及公共資訊評估表現較差，尤其是損害評估，達成評估項目之比例及百分之二十。資料也顯示，即使針對責任醫院做評估，實際上評估細項目仍會因評估人員的差異而不同。結論：建立檢查表評估制度或許是使我國災難應變之學術單位、政府、以及實務單位可以有共同得依據來實施、判讀、以及改進災難應變演習的方式。

關鍵字

災難 ； 演習 ； 評估

並列摘要

Introduction : There is no disaster exercise evaluation evaluation system in Taiwan. It is therefore difficult to improve the disaster response system for Taiwan using objective findings from disaster exercises. We have tried to implement a disaster evaluation project as part of an annual regional disaster exercise.
Materials and methods : An exercise based on the disaster response to an air crash with mass casualties involving the local emergency medical service system and the military system was held at Tainan Airport in 2001. We developed an evaluation program together with an evaluation team. Members of this team included the following: specialists from the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA), the fire department, hospitals, various faculties at the university and a number of military units. We also developed a checklist made up of 10 sections, each with several subsections. The evaluation rankings used were made up of good, bad, and non-available/non-observed.
Results : Using this system, it was possible to evaluate each section/subsection and obtain a percentage rating for each section. During this exercise, more than 70% of the evaluated items in alert/notification and communication sections achieved a rating of good. The individual/family assistance evacuation, damage assessment, and emergency public information sections had poorer average ratings. Least successful was damage assessment with less than 20% of its items ranked as good. There were also some differences noted in the evaluations when the two hospitals involved in the exercise were compared.
Conclusion : The establishment of a checklist and the use of this type of evaluation format is a feasible way, based on the exercise results, to implant, interpret and improve disaster response. We suggest that further studies are conducted in the future for various types of disasters in order to provide adequate samples for statistic evaluation of this approach.

並列關鍵字

disaster ； exercise ； evaluation