Objective:The Society of Academic Emergency Medicine Disaster Medicine Interest Group, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response – Technical Resources, Assistance Center, and Information Exchange (ASPR TRACIE) team, and the National Institutes of Health Library searched disaster medicine peer-reviewed and gray literature to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field for academics and practitioners.Methods:MEDLINE/PubMed and Scopus databases were searched with key words. Additional gray literature and focused hand search were performed. A Level I review of titles and abstracts with inclusion criteria of disaster medicine, health care system, and disaster type concepts was performed. Eight reviewers performed Level II full-text review and formal scoring for overall quality, impact, clarity, and importance, with scoring ranging from 0 to 20. Reviewers summarized and critiqued articles scoring 16.5 and above.Results:Articles totaling 1176 were identified, and 347 were screened in a Level II review. Of these, 193 (56%) were Original Research, 117 (34%) Case Report or other, and 37 (11%) were Review/Meta-Analysis. The average final score after a Level II review was 11.34. Eighteen articles scored 16.5 or higher. Of the 18 articles, 9 (50%) were Case Report or other, 7 (39%) were Original Research, and 2 (11%) were Review/Meta-Analysis.Conclusions:This first review highlighted the breadth of disaster medicine, including emerging infectious disease outbreaks, terror attacks, and natural disasters. We hope this review becomes an annual source of actionable, pertinent literature for the emerging field of disaster medicine.

This document represents the best opinion of CNA at the time of issue. It does not necessarily reoresent the opinion of th^-n^mrtment of the Navv.

No abstract

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources gathering and maintaining the data needed and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22302-4302, and ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)(U) The Navy Surgeon General has asked CNA to evaluate physicians' job satisfaction and retention within the existing climate to determine if major issues exist. The scope of the study was expanded to include a comparative analysis of compensation for Navy physicians continuing a military career versus leaving for a private-sector track. We find that a substantial current compensation gap exists between military and private-sector physicians, particularly at the end of the 7-year career point, and the disparity in total compensation varies widely by medical specialty. Our finds show, however, that as Navy physicians accrue more military service, it becomes more lucrative for them to complete 20 years, retire, and then pursue a private career. This information memorandum documents the results of these compensation comparisons.14. SUBJECT TERMS Benefits, civilian personnel, compensation, incentive contracts, job satisfaction, medical personnel, naval personnel, officer personnel, personnel retention, physicians, salaries, surveys EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction and FindingsCongress authorizes the Department of Defense to offer financial incentives to uniformed physicians to attract and retain the desired force structure. A policy board annually reviews physician manning, civilian income data, and military health system requirements to determine the Multi-year Special Pay (MSP) and Incentive Special Pay (ISP) plan rates that will be offered to uniformed physicians. The Navy Surgeon General has asked the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) to evaluate physicians' job satisfaction and retention within the existing climate to determine if major issues exist. The scope of the study was expanded to include a comparative analysis of compensation for Navy physicians continuing a military career versus leaving for a private-sector track.The "compensation package" offered to both military and private-sector physicians comprises many elements. It is vital that policy-makers and individual military physicians understand all the components of compensation (salary, incentive pays, pension, vacations, health care, and other benefits) to make a prudent comparison of the military and the private sector. We find that a substantial current compensation gap exists between military and private-sector physicians, particularly at the end of the 7-year career point, and the disparity in total compensation varies widely by medical specialty. O...

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources gathering and maintaining the data needed and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 223024302, and ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)(U) The military Health System (MHS) must execute twin missions. The primary mission of the MHS and the three Service medical departments is force health protection. This readiness mission involves providing medical support in combat and other military operations and maintaining the day-to-day health of about 1.5 million men and women who serve in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps. The second mission is to provide a health care benefit to nearly 6.6 million other people who are eligible to use the MHS. Because the Department of Defense (DOD) relies on a single force to meet the sometimes disparate missions, it must cultivate a workforce that is dedicated to caring for patients, committed to continuous improvement in performance and productivity, and competent in both wartime and peacetime. This challenge is particularly difficult because uniformed health care professionals are costly to access and train, and they have skills that are in demand in the private sector. Summary IntroductionThe Military Health System (MHS), one of the largest and oldest health care delivery systems in the United States, must execute twin missions. The primary mission of the MHS and the three Service medical departments is force health protection. This readiness mission involves providing medical support in combat and other military operations and maintaining the day-to-day health of about 1.5 million men and women who serve in the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines Corps. The second mission is to provide a health care benefit to nearly 6.6 million other people who are eligible to use the MHS.Because the Department of Defense (DoD) relies on a single force to meet these sometimes disparate missions, it must cultivate a workforce that is dedicated to caring for patients, committed to continuous improvement in performance and productivity, and competent in both wartime and peacetime. This challenge is particularly difficult because uniformed health care professionals are costly to access and train, and they have skills that are in demand in the private sector.Congressional awareness of this mandate and competition from the private sector for qualified health care professionals resulted in the following committee language in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001:The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a review and to report to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Represe...