Chile Earthquake Reconnaissance Trip March 2010


Published on

Academic/EERI rapid reconnaissance trip to Chile to investigate relationship between building damage and hospital operations.

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Chile Earthquake Reconnaissance Trip March 2010

  1. 1. Chile Earthquake Reconnaissance Trip March 2010Rick Bissell, PhD UMBC Dept. Emergency Health Services<br />
  2. 2. Where is Chile?<br />
  3. 3. Geographic Background<br />Source: NYTimes 3 March 2010<br />
  4. 4. Tectonics<br />Source;<br />
  5. 5. Trip Background<br />Rapid reconnaissance grant from NSF through the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI).<br />Focus of our subgroup: Effects of earthquake building damage on health care provision. <br />Focus of larger group: Examination of reasons structures failed (or didn’t) in the most powerful earthquake in recent history.<br />
  6. 6. Team Members<br />Rick Bissell<br />U. of Maryland, Baltimore County<br />Francisco de la Masa<br />Ministerio de Salud<br />Judith Mitrani-Reiser<br />Johns Hopkins University<br />Bill Holmes<br />Rutherford & Chekene<br />Tom Kirsch<br />Johns Hopkins University<br />Mike Mahoney<br />FEMA<br />Nicolas Santa Cruz<br />Pontificia Universidad Catolica<br />
  7. 7. Earthquake Description<br />Magnitude 8.8, by far the largest since 1964.<br />Lasted 1.5 – 3.5 minutes<br />Subduction-type quake; tend to be most damaging.<br />3:34 AM; timing saved many lives.<br />Tsunami followed almost immediately in 3 waves. <br />> 150 aftershocks at mag. 5 or greater<br />
  8. 8. Earthquake Description - 2<br />Santiago (~ 450km from epicenter) moved 24cm to the west. <br />Earthquake felt as far away as Buenos Aires, Argentina (~1,500km ) and Sao Paulo, Brazil (~3,000km).<br />Coastal area elevation increases are expected but not confirmed.<br />
  9. 9. Destruction Summary<br />~ 450 deaths, ~ 500 injured, 800,000 homeless<br />> 60% of deaths due to tsunami<br />Most destruction in Concepción, Talcahuano, Valdivia, Arauco, Coronel, Los Angeles, Talca and Maule areas.<br />Destruction area covers 80% of Chile’s pop.<br />Tsunami severely damaged several occupied coastal areas and the port of Talcahuano.<br />
  10. 10. Destruction Summary - 2<br />Most modern buildings (p 1995) did pretty well, except for a few catastrophic failures.<br />Major failures in older adobe-based housing and historical buildings.<br />Some 1940s era hospitals w/very thick walls fared pretty well.<br />Numerous bridges were lost, roads suffered major damage.<br />
  11. 11. Destruction Summary - 3<br />Water systems in Concepción, Talcahuano and other coastal towns suffered major failures due to broken piping.<br />Electrical system for the entire country was out for 4-7 days. Subsequent shorter outages.<br />Communications out for 3-5 days.<br />Few notable fires, except at Univ. Concepción.<br />
  12. 12. Concepción O’Higgins Bldg.<br />
  13. 13. Talca<br />
  14. 14. Talca<br />
  15. 15. Prat Bldg Concepción<br />
  16. 16. Prat Bldg top<br />
  17. 17. Prat Bldg west side split<br />
  18. 18. Prat Bldg bottom<br />
  19. 19. Prat Bldg rescue hole bottom<br />
  20. 20. Prat Bldg rescue holes east side <br />
  21. 21. Prat Bldg rescue holes east side<br />
  22. 22. New Prat Bldg beam/column damage 6th Fl<br />
  23. 23. Concepción bridge<br />
  24. 24. Concepción bridge<br />
  25. 25. Universidad Concepción Chemistry Bldg<br />
  26. 26. Talcahuano water line w/Judy MitraniReiser<br />
  27. 27. Talcahuano water damage housing<br />
  28. 28. Talcahuano bldg and boat<br />
  29. 29. Bissell in drydock<br />
  30. 30. Talcahuano port damage<br />
  31. 31. Concepción crushed cars<br />
  32. 32. Concepción water <br />in streets<br />
  33. 33. Concepción grain storage silos<br />
  34. 34. Concepción street tents<br />
  35. 35. Hospital Damage<br />No hospital (to our knowledge) suffered a complete structural failure.<br />Of 79 affected hospitals, 54 require minor repair, 8 major repair, and 17 a complete rebuild. (Source: 22 Mar 2010<br />Many had extensive loss of equipment.<br />All lost power, external water supply, communications.<br />
  36. 36. Talca Hospital<br />
  37. 37. Talca Hospital<br />
  38. 38. Talca Hospital<br />
  39. 39. Talca Hospital<br />
  40. 40. Talca Hospital<br />
  41. 41. Talca Hospital<br />
  42. 42. Impressive field hospital in Talca run by Chilean military<br />
  43. 43. Summary of Physical Damage:Nonstructural<br />Severe damage to suspended (“American”) ceilings.<br />Loss of power, water, and communication.<br />Mechanical equipment damage resulted in loss of hot water forcing hospitals to be creative with kitchen, laundry, and sterilization services (e.g., water boilers and chillers).<br />Medical equipment damage forced hospitals to do their sterilization off site, and disrupted diagnostics (e.g., damaged radiology equipment)<br />Water damage forced hospitals to shut down entire buildings, disrupted dialysis treatment, and had severe sterilization implications (e.g., surgical ward).<br />Standalone shelving damage, resulting in disorganization of medical records for few days to several weeks (e.g., Talcahueno still organizing now!). <br />
  44. 44. Hospital Physical Damage Impact<br />Damage resulting from very small details can shut down a hospital.<br />Water damage from even a small pipe break can shut down operations.<br />Securing both mechanical and medical equipment can be critical to maintaining hospital operations.<br />Distributions to systems are not as critical in Chile and were more redundant.<br />
  45. 45. Hospital Operability Issues:Redundant Systems<br />All hospitals had backup systems for water and electricity, although the systems were not always sufficient.<br />None had adequate backup for sewer.<br />Communications systems needed planning and redundancy.<br />Hospitals proved remarkably adept at using ambulance radios for local communications.<br />
  46. 46. Hospital Operability Issues:Pre-event Emergency Planning<br />Hospital emergency committees were very helpful in providing leadership.<br />All directors said emergency plans needed to be redone in a practical way, which includes local decision making. <br />Current plans have decisions being made in Santiago, but did not take into account communications problems.<br />
  47. 47. Hospital Operability Issues:Evacuations and Transfers<br />Some hospital s did an excellent job in evacuating patients, while others did not; loss of elevators impacted evacuation capability; many had to carry patients (old style ramps actually were very efficient).<br />Hospitals were very resourceful at relocating patients within their own facilities.<br />US hospitals should reconsider policy of mass transfer of patients to other hospitals based on damage.<br />Most hospitals reduced patient load by:<br />Discharging patients to families with instructions for care. <br />Some hospitals sped up normal transfer of patients back to their home hospitals, especially maternity.<br />
  48. 48. Summary<br />This is a preliminary investigation, hopefully leading to a more thorough one.<br />Hospitals do not have to collapse to be rendered inoperable.<br />Hospital directors noted the need for more local preparedness planning and training and more decision-making autonomy.<br />Recent collaboration with EMS (SAMU) led to a very effective use of EMS as a communications and coordinating unit when other systems failed.<br />