COVID-19 has proven to be a formidable challenge for many countries in the European Union to manage effectively. The European Union has implemented numerous strategies to face emerging issues. Member States have adopted measures such as the closure of borders and significant limitations on the mobility of people to mitigate the spread of the virus. An unprecedented crisis coordination effort between Member States has facilitated the ability to purchase equipment, personal protective equipment, and other medical supplies. Attention has also been focused on providing substantive money for research to find a vaccine and promote effective treatment therapies. Financial support has been made available to protect worker salaries and businesses to help facilitate a return to a functional economy. Lessons learned to date from COVID-19 in the European Union are many; the current crisis highlights the need to think about future pandemics from a population-based management approach and apply outside the box critical thinking. Due to the complexity, intensity, and frequency of complex disasters, global leaders in healthcare, government, and business will need to pivot from siloed approaches to decision-making to embrace multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary levels of cooperation. This cooperation requires courage and leadership to recognize that changes are necessary to avoid making the same mistakes we have planned countless times on avoiding. This study focuses on the European Union’s initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic, starting with how the European Union first learned and processed the global information arising out of China, followed by the incremental population-based medicine/management decisions made that currently are defining the European Union’s capacity and capability. The capacity to organize, deliver, and monitor care to a specific clinical population under a population-based management target includes strict social distancing strategies, contact testing and tracing, testing for the virus antigen and its antibodies, isolation, and treatment modalities such as new mitigating medications, and finally, a vaccine.

Current disaster taxonomy describes diversity, distinguishing characteristics, and common relations in disaster event classifications. The impact of compromised public health infrastructure and systems on health consequences defines and greatly influences the manner in which disasters are observed, planned for, and managed, especially those that are geographically widespread, population dense, and prolonged. What may first result in direct injuries and death may rapidly change to excess indirect illness and subsequent death as essential public health resources are destroyed, deteriorate, or are systematically denied to vulnerable populations. Public health and public health infrastructure and systems in developed and developing countries must be seen as strategic and security issues that deserve international public health resource monitoring attention from disaster managers, urban planners, the global humanitarian community, World Health Organization authorities, and participating parties to war and conflict. We posit here that disaster frameworks be reformed to emphasize and clarify the relation of public health emergencies and modern disasters. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2008;2:192–199)

Armed conflicts degrade established healthcare systems, which typically manifests as a resurgence of preventable infectious diseases. While 70% of deaths globally are now from non-communicable disease; in low-income countries, respiratory infections, diarrheal illness, malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDs are all in the top 10 causes of death. The burden of these infectious diseases is exacerbated by armed conflict, translating into even more dramatic long-term consequences. This rapid evidence review searched electronic databases in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Of 381 identified publications, 73 were included in this review. Several authors indicate that the impact of infectious diseases increases in wars and armed conflicts due to disruption to surveillance and response systems that were often poorly developed to begin with. Although the true impact of conflict on infectious disease spread is not known and requires further research, the link between them is indisputable. Current decision-making management systems are insufficient and only pass the baton to the next unwary generation.

Public health emergencies of international concern, in the form of infectious disease outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics, represent an increasing risk to the worldʼs population. Management requires coordinated responses, across many disciplines and nations, and the capacity to muster proper national and global public health education, infrastructure, and prevention measures. Unfortunately, increasing numbers of nations are ruled by autocratic regimes which have characteristically failed to adopt investments in public health infrastructure, education, and prevention measures to keep pace with population growth and density. Autocratic leaders have a direct impact on health security, a direct negative impact on health, and create adverse political and economic conditions that only complicate the crisis further. This is most evident in autocratic regimes where health protections have been seriously and purposely curtailed. All autocratic regimes define public health along economic and political imperatives that are similar across borders and cultures. Autocratic regimes are seriously handicapped by sociopathic narcissistic leaders who are incapable of understanding the health consequences of infectious diseases or the impact on their population. A cross section of autocratic nations currently experiencing the impact of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) are reviewed to demonstrate the manner where self-serving regimes fail to manage health crises and place the rest of the world at increasing risk. It is time to re-address the pre-SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) global agendas calling for stronger strategic capacity, legal authority, support, and institutional status under World Health Organization (WHO) leadership granted by an International Health Regulations Treaty. Treaties remain the most successful means the world has in preventing, preparing for, and controlling epidemics in an increasingly globalized world.“Honesty is worth a lot more than hope…” The Economist, February 17, 2020.

Introduction: Emergency service (ambulance, police, fire) call-takers and dispatchers are often exposed to duty-related trauma, placing them at increased risk for developing mental health challenges like stress, anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Their unique working environment also puts them at-risk for physical health issues like obesity, headache, backache, and insomnia. Along with the stress associated with being on the receiving end of difficult calls, call-takers and dispatchers also deal with the pressure and demand of following protocol despite dealing with the variability of complex and stressful situations.Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted using the MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, and PsychInfo databases.Results: A total of 25 publications were retrieved by the search strategy. The majority of studies (n = 13; 52%) reported a quantitative methodology, while nine (36%) reported the use of a qualitative research methodology. One study reported a mixed-methods methodology, one reported an evaluability assessment with semi-structured interviews, one reported on a case study, and one was a systematic review with a narrative synthesis.Discussion: Challenges to physical health included: shift-work leading to lack of physical activity, poor nutrition, and obesity; outdated and ergonomically ill-fitted equipment, and physically confining and isolating work spaces leading to physical injuries; inadequate breaks leading to fatigue; and high noise levels and poor lighting being correlated with higher cortisol levels. Challenges to mental health included: being exposed to traumatic calls; working in high-pressure environments with little downtime in between stressful calls; inadequate debriefing after stressful calls; inappropriate training for mental-health-related calls; and being exposed to verbally aggressive callers. Lack of support from leadership was an additional source of stress.Conclusion: Emergency service call-takers and dispatchers experience both physical and mental health challenges as a result of their work, which appears to be related to a range of both operational and support-based issues. Future research should explore the long-term effects of these physical and mental health challenges.

Since the 1990s, Italian hospitals are required to comply with emergency disaster plans known as Emergency Plan for Massive Influx of Casualties. While various studies reveal that hospitals overall suffer from an insufficient preparedness level, the aim of this study was to better determine the preparedness level of Emergency Departments of Italian hospitals by assessing the knowledge-base of emergency physicians regarding basic disaster planning and procedures. A prospective observational study utilized a convenience sample of Italian Emergency Departments identified from the Italian Ministry of Health website. Anonymous telephone interviews were conducted of medical consultants in charge at the time in the respective Emergency Departments, and were structured in 3 parts: (1) general data and demographics, (2) the current disaster plan and (3) protocols and actions of the disaster plan. Eighty-five Emergency Departments met inclusion criteria, and 69 (81 %) agreed to undergo the interview. Only 45 % of participants declared to know what an Emergency Plan for Massive Influx of Casualties is, 41 % believed to know who has the authority to activate the plan, 38 % knew who is in charge of intra-hospital operations. In Part 3 physicians revealed a worrisome inconsistency in critical content knowledge of their answers. Results demonstrate a poor knowledge-base of basic hospital disaster planning concepts by Italian Emergency Department physicians-on-duty. These findings should alert authorities to enhance staff disaster preparedness education, training and follow-up to ensure that these plans are known to all who have responsibility for disaster risk reduction and management capacity.