Mental Health Emergency Preparedness: The Need for Training and Coordination at the State Level

Abstract

Introduction:The coordination and integration of mental health agencies' plans into disaster responses is a critical step for ensuring effective response to all-hazard emergencies.Problem:In order to remedy the current lack of integration of mental health into emergency preparedness training, researchers must assess mental health emergency preparedness training needs. To date, no recognized assessment exists.The current study addresses this need by qualitatively surveying public health and allied health professionals regarding mental health preparedness in Kansas.Methods:Participants included 144 professionals from public health and allied fields, all of whom attended one of seven training presentations on mental health preparedness. Following each presentation, participants provided written responses to nine qualitative questions about preparedness and mental health preparedness needs, as well as demographic information, and a program evaluation. Survey questions addressed perceptions of bioterrorism and mental health preparedness, perceptions about resource and training needs, as well as coordination of preparedness efforts.Results:Overall, few respondents indicated that they felt their county or community was prepared to respond to an attack. Respondents felt less prepared for mental health issues than they did for preparedness issues in general. The largest proportion of respondents reported that they would look to a community mental health center or the state health department for mental health preparedness information. Most respondents recognized the helpfulness of interagency coordination for mental health preparedness, and reported a willingness to take an active role in coordination.Conclusions:The current study provides important data about the gaps regarding mental health preparedness in Kansas.This study demonstrates the present lack of preparedness and the need for coordination to reach an appropriate level of mental health preparedness for the state.These findings are the first step to implementing effective distribution of information and training.

Disaster Preparedness among Health Professionals and Support Staff: What is Effective? An Integrative Literature Review

“…, 16 , 29 , 33 Additionally, some studies identified that content could be based on national or international competencies 20 25 , 33 , 38 , 39 The methods of disaster preparedness programs included online learning, didactic, self-learning, disaster exercises, or blended learning involving more than one method of teaching or learning. All of the methods of preparation led to an improvement in perceived disaster preparedness, disaster knowledge, or attitudes 3 …”

“…Disaster education programs outlined and evaluated in the research articles can be broadly divided into three types of programs: those that are based on established competencies; 15 , 20 , 25 , 38 , 39 those that cover clinical or technical knowledge; 4 , 16 , 26 and programs which cover clinical, technical, or structural disaster knowledge 5 9 , 15 , 17 , 19 - 22 , 24 , 25 , 34 , 39 An additional area of content, which is predominantly explored in qualitative research which allowed health professionals with experience working in disasters to highlight important skills for them, is that of non-clinical and non-technical skills or abilities that can enhance the performance of health professionals during disasters.…”

Factors Predicting Individual Emergency Preparedness: A Multi-state Analysis of 2006 BRFSS Data

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] In addition to these studies, a substantial volume of literature exists on the preparedness of public health agencies, first responders, and other health professionals. [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] However, to date there has been a relative dearth of research on the personal disaster preparedness activities of the general public. What research does exist on the personal preparedness of individuals has either been focused on specific geographic areas, such as Los Angeles, or dealt with terrorism-specific preparedness, and the research has stopped short of using multivariate analysis to identify the factors that most strongly influence personal disaster preparedness.…”

An adaptive governance approach to disaster‐related behavioural health services

“…Disaster-related behavioural and mental health services are frequently treated as an afterthought to wider disaster response efforts, and state-level efforts are quite variable (DHHS, 2003). Moreover, if funding allocation is any indicator of policy priority, much of the current policies are geared towards the physical health implications or structural consequences of disasters rather than to programmes related to psychological impacts on victims and emergency responders (Hawley et al, 2007). Moreover, if funding allocation is any indicator of policy priority, much of the current policies are geared towards the physical health implications or structural consequences of disasters rather than to programmes related to psychological impacts on victims and emergency responders (Hawley et al, 2007).…”

“…In 2005, for example, only half of the publicly available public health plans included mental health preparedness considerations and only 18 per cent of emergency plans incorporated mental health concerns (Robertson et al, 2007). Moreover, if funding allocation is any indicator of policy priority, much of the current policies are geared towards the physical health implications or structural consequences of disasters rather than to programmes related to psychological impacts on victims and emergency responders (Hawley et al, 2007).…”