Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Feb;98(2):118-27.
doi: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181a6de7d.

The view from the trenches: part 1-emergency medical response plans and the need for EPR screening

Affiliations

The view from the trenches: part 1-emergency medical response plans and the need for EPR screening

Robert M Gougelet et al. Health Phys. 2010 Feb.

Abstract

Few natural disasters or intentional acts of war or terrorism have the potential for such severe impact upon a population and infrastructure as the intentional detonation of a nuclear device within a major U.S. city. In stark contrast to other disasters or even a "dirty bomb," hundreds of thousands will be affected and potentially exposed to a clinically significant dose of ionizing radiation. This will result in immediate deaths and injuries and subsequently the development of Acute Radiation Syndrome (ARS). Additionally, millions more who are unlikely to develop ARS will seek medical evaluation and treatment, overwhelming the capacity of an already compromised medical system. In this paper, the authors propose that in vivo electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) dosimetry be utilized to screen large numbers of potentially exposed victims, and that this screening process be incorporated into the medical-surge framework that is currently being implemented across the nation for other catastrophic public health emergencies. The National Incident Management System (NIMS), the National Response Framework (NRF), the Target Capabilities List (TCL), Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPD), as well as additional guidance from multiple federal agencies provide a solid framework for this response. The effective screening of potentially-exposed victims directly following a nuclear attack could decrease the number of patients seeking immediate medical care by greater than 90%.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The Weill/Cornell bioterrorism and epidemic outbreak response model. [Accessed 28 October 2008];2004 Available at ahrq.goV/research/biomodel3/
    1. Alt LA, Forcino DC, Walder RI. Nuclear events and their consequences. In: Walker RI, Cerveny TJ, editors. Medical consequences of nuclear warfare Part I, vol 2 Textbook of military medicine. Falls Church, VA: TMM Publications, Office of the Surgeon General; 1989.
    1. Armed Forces Radiobiology Institute. Medical management of radiological casualties handbook. Bethesda, MD: Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute; 2003.
    1. Bell WC, Dallas CE. Vulnerability of populations and the urban health care systems to nuclear weapon attack—examples from four American cities. Int J Health Geogr. 2007;6(5) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Blank S, Moskin LC, Zucker JR. An ounce of prevention is a ton of work: Mass antibiotic prophylaxis for anthrax, New York City, 2001. [Accessed 28 October 2008];Emerg Infect Dis. 2003 Jun; Available at cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol9no6/03-0118.htm. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms