A NATIONAL STUDY EXAMINING CLOSED POINTS OF DISPENSING (PODS): EXISTENCE, PREPAREDNESS, EXERCISE PARTICIPATION, AND TRAINING PROVIDED

作者：Rebmann Terri^*; Loux Travis M; Swick Zachary; Reddick David; Dolgin Harlan; Anthony John; Prasad Rohan

来源：Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science , 2014, 12(4): 208-216.

DOI：10.1089/bsp.2014.0014

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends using open points of dispensing (PODs) and alternative modalities, such as closed PODs, for mass dispensing of medical countermeasures. However, closed POD existence has not been assessed. In 2013 we sent an online questionnaire to US Cities Readiness Initiative (CRI) and non-CRI public health disaster planners. Chi-square tests were used to determine differences between CRIs and non-CRIs when comparing having at least 1 closed POD, and to compare having a closed POD and perceived mass dispensing preparedness. A total of 301 disaster planners participated. Almost all (89.3%, n = 218) jurisdictions have considered establishing a closed POD, and three-quarters (74.2%, n = 181) currently have at least one. CRIs were more likely than non-CRIs to have a closed POD (85.0% vs 58.5%, X-2 = 21.3, p<.001). Those with 1 or more closed PODs were more likely to believe their jurisdiction could distribute medical countermeasures within 48 hours compared to those without a closed POD (78.5% vs 21.5%; X-2 = 10.8, p=.001). Half had a written plan and/or written standing orders (59.1% and 52.5%, respectively). Almost half (42%, n = 72) have done no preevent training for POD staff in the past 2 years; almost 20% (18%, n = 32) do not plan to offer any just-in-time training. Nearly 40% (n = 70) have conducted no exercises in the past year. Closed PODs contribute to community preparedness; their establishment should be followed by development of written plans, worker training, and exercises.

• 出版日期2014-8