Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-glrdx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T08:29:43.752Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measures of Effectiveness in Large-scale Bioterrorism Events

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Frederick M. Burkle Jr
Frederick M. Burkle Jr*
Affiliation:
Project Director, Biosecurity and Health Preparedness Expansion Grant, University of Texas at Houston and University of Hawaii, Johns A. Burns School of Medicine, Houston, Texas and Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
*
Fburkle@jhsph.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Measures of effectiveness (MOEs) are defined as operationally quantifiable management tools that provide a means for measuring effectiveness, outcome, and performance. No clear MOEs exist for determining success or failure of the management of a bioterrorism response. This is especially critical because management requires a multi-agency and multi-disciplinary decision-making and evaluation process. It is suggested that the minimum MOEs required to operationally measure outcome must contain a measuring response capacity for: (1) real-time public health surveillance system; (2) full coverage health information system; (3) capacity to measure variance across management timelines; (4) demonstrated decline in mortality and morbidity; (5) control of transmission rates of communicable agents; and (6) resource distribution across the entire population.

Keywords

bioagentsbioterrorismdisaster managementhealth indicatorshomeland securitymass casualty incidentsmeasures of effectivenessoutcome indicators performance indicators

Information

Type
Special Report
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 18 , Issue 3: Terrorism-II: Special Reports , September 2003 , pp. 258 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Burkle, FM: Complex, Humanitarian Emergencies: III. Measures of Effectiveness. Prehosp Disast Med 1995; 10(1): 48–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Burkle, FM: Measures of effectiveness in complex emergencies: Lecture presentation: Center of Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance, Honolulu, Hawaii, and Center for International Emergency, Disaster and Refugee Studies, Johns Hopkins University Medical Institutions: 1995–2003.Google Scholar
3.Dworken, JT: Measures of effectiveness (MOEs) for humanitarian intervention: Restore Hope and beyond. Center for Naval Analyses. Working paper 27, 1993.Google Scholar
4.Raisbeck, G: How the choice of measures of effectiveness constrains operational analysis. Interfaces 1979; 9: 85–93.Google Scholar
5.Burkle, FM: Complex Emergencies: Measuring effectiveness across a multitude of indicators. Standardized monitoring and assessment of relief and transition (SMART) workshop. Washington, DC, 26 July, 2002. Available at http://www.smartindicators.org/workshop/agenda2.htm. Accessed 26 May 2003.Google Scholar
6.Sheck, A: Threat of bioterrorism out of proportion? Think again, say experts. Emerg Med News 2000; 3–5.Google Scholar
7.Page, D: Epidemic outbreak or biological attack? Emerg Med News 2000; 41–42.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Burkle, FM: Mass casualty management of a large-scale bioterrorist event: An epidemiological approach that shapes triage decisions. Emerg Med Clin N Am 2002; 20: 409–436.Google ScholarPubMed
9.Scientific and Technical Intelligence Committee: Advances in Genomics and Proteomics by 2012—Summary of Open Conference of US Researchers. National Intelligence Council. The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA. 11 January 2002, pp 1–36.Google Scholar
10.Platt, N, Anderson, LB, Grotte, JH: Measures of effectiveness for the deployment of biological sensors. 6th CBW Protection Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden, 10–15 May 1998. Institute for Defense Analysis, Alexandria, VA. Available at http://www.cbwsymp.foa.se/6detection.html. Accessed 22 December 2000.Google Scholar
11.Giovanni, C, Reynolds, B, Harwell, R, Stonecipher, EB, Burkle, FM: Community reaction to bioterrorism: Prospective study of simulated outbreak. Emerg Infect Dis [serial online] 2003 Jun;9 (6), Available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/citation.htm. Accessed on 07 May 2003.Google Scholar
12.Jernigan, JA, Stephens, DS, Ashford, DA, et al: Bioterrorism-related inhala-tional anthrax: The first 10 cases reported in the United States. Emerg Inf Dis [serial online] 2001 Nov-Dec 7 (6). Available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no6/pdf/jernigan.htm. Accessed 26 May 2003.Google Scholar
13.Nelson, KE, Williams, CM, Graham, NMH: Infectious disease epidemiology: Theory and practice. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publilishers; 2001. pp 119–169.Google Scholar
14.Gani, R, Leach, S: Transmission potential of smallpox in contemporary populations. 13 December 2001, Letters to Nature, Nature 2001; 414: 748–751.Google Scholar