社区长期护理申诉专员计划灾难援助:准备好了,愿意还是能够?

IF 0.7 4区 管理学 Q4 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
H. Wayne Nelson, B. Yang, F. Ellen Netting, Erin Monahan
{"title":"社区长期护理申诉专员计划灾难援助:准备好了,愿意还是能够?","authors":"H. Wayne Nelson, B. Yang, F. Ellen Netting, Erin Monahan","doi":"10.1515/jhsem-2019-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The high elder care death toll of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, pushed the federally mandated Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program (LTCOP) into the unsought and unforeseen realm of disaster preparedness. This new role was an extension of the LTCOP’s historic resident’s rights investigative case advocacy. To assess if, how, and to what extent local ombudsmen adapted to this new function, 102 local LTCOP leaders completed a telephone survey based on the CMS Emergency Planning Checklist. This assessed their own and their programs’: (a) readiness to help facilities reduce disaster threats to residents, (b) familiarity with relevant disaster laws, rules, and resources; (c) readiness to help residents through the disaster cycle; and (d) levels of disaster training and/or their plans to provide such training to their staff and LTC stakeholders. Forty-two respondents (41.13%) had experienced a public disaster but over half or those responding (n = 56, 54.90%) felt fairly to somewhat prepared to help in a public crisis. After being ready to work away from their office during a crisis (x¯$\\overline{x}$ = 4.14, SD = 1.00) respondents felt most prepared “to assist during nursing home emergency closure and evacuation” (x¯$\\overline{x}$ = 3.86, SD = 1.09). t-tests revealed that respondents with a disaster experience were significantly more prepared in all assessed dimensions than as those without disaster experience. The study highlights the training needs of ombudsmen in high risk areas to better prepare them for disaster mitigation in nursing homes.","PeriodicalId":46847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community Long Term Care Ombudsman Program Disaster Assistance: Ready, Willing or Able?\",\"authors\":\"H. Wayne Nelson, B. Yang, F. Ellen Netting, Erin Monahan\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jhsem-2019-0015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The high elder care death toll of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, pushed the federally mandated Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program (LTCOP) into the unsought and unforeseen realm of disaster preparedness. This new role was an extension of the LTCOP’s historic resident’s rights investigative case advocacy. To assess if, how, and to what extent local ombudsmen adapted to this new function, 102 local LTCOP leaders completed a telephone survey based on the CMS Emergency Planning Checklist. This assessed their own and their programs’: (a) readiness to help facilities reduce disaster threats to residents, (b) familiarity with relevant disaster laws, rules, and resources; (c) readiness to help residents through the disaster cycle; and (d) levels of disaster training and/or their plans to provide such training to their staff and LTC stakeholders. Forty-two respondents (41.13%) had experienced a public disaster but over half or those responding (n = 56, 54.90%) felt fairly to somewhat prepared to help in a public crisis. After being ready to work away from their office during a crisis (x¯$\\\\overline{x}$ = 4.14, SD = 1.00) respondents felt most prepared “to assist during nursing home emergency closure and evacuation” (x¯$\\\\overline{x}$ = 3.86, SD = 1.09). t-tests revealed that respondents with a disaster experience were significantly more prepared in all assessed dimensions than as those without disaster experience. The study highlights the training needs of ombudsmen in high risk areas to better prepare them for disaster mitigation in nursing homes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2019-0015\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2019-0015","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2005年卡特里娜飓风造成的老年人护理死亡人数之高,将联邦政府授权的长期护理监察员计划(LTCOP)推向了一个意想不到的备灾领域。这个新角色是LTCOP历史上居民权利调查案件倡导的延伸。为了评估地方监察员是否、如何以及在多大程度上适应这一新职能,102名地方LTCOP领导人根据CMS应急计划清单完成了一项电话调查。评估他们自己和他们的项目:(a)准备帮助设施减少对居民的灾害威胁;(b)熟悉相关的灾害法律、规则和资源;(c)准备好帮助居民渡过灾害周期;(d)灾害培训水平和/或向其员工和LTC利益相关者提供此类培训的计划。42名受访者(41.13%)经历过公共灾难,但超过一半的受访者(n = 56, 54.90%)认为在公共危机中有一定的帮助准备。在危机期间准备离开办公室工作后(x¯$\overline{x}$ = 4.14, SD = 1.00),受访者认为最准备“在养老院紧急关闭和疏散期间提供帮助”(x¯$\overline{x}$ = 3.86, SD = 1.09)。t检验显示,有灾难经历的受访者在所有评估维度上都比没有灾难经历的受访者准备得更充分。这项研究强调了对高风险地区监察员的培训需求,以便使他们更好地为养老院的减灾工作做好准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Community Long Term Care Ombudsman Program Disaster Assistance: Ready, Willing or Able?
Abstract The high elder care death toll of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, pushed the federally mandated Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program (LTCOP) into the unsought and unforeseen realm of disaster preparedness. This new role was an extension of the LTCOP’s historic resident’s rights investigative case advocacy. To assess if, how, and to what extent local ombudsmen adapted to this new function, 102 local LTCOP leaders completed a telephone survey based on the CMS Emergency Planning Checklist. This assessed their own and their programs’: (a) readiness to help facilities reduce disaster threats to residents, (b) familiarity with relevant disaster laws, rules, and resources; (c) readiness to help residents through the disaster cycle; and (d) levels of disaster training and/or their plans to provide such training to their staff and LTC stakeholders. Forty-two respondents (41.13%) had experienced a public disaster but over half or those responding (n = 56, 54.90%) felt fairly to somewhat prepared to help in a public crisis. After being ready to work away from their office during a crisis (x¯$\overline{x}$ = 4.14, SD = 1.00) respondents felt most prepared “to assist during nursing home emergency closure and evacuation” (x¯$\overline{x}$ = 3.86, SD = 1.09). t-tests revealed that respondents with a disaster experience were significantly more prepared in all assessed dimensions than as those without disaster experience. The study highlights the training needs of ombudsmen in high risk areas to better prepare them for disaster mitigation in nursing homes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management publishes original, innovative, and timely articles describing research or practice in the fields of homeland security and emergency management. JHSEM publishes not only peer-reviewed articles, but also news and communiqués from researchers and practitioners, and book/media reviews. Content comes from a broad array of authors representing many professions, including emergency management, engineering, political science and policy, decision science, and health and medicine, as well as from emergency management and homeland security practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信