Lucchini Roberto G, Hashim Dana, Acquilla Sushma, Basanets Angela, Bertazzi Pier Alberto, Bushmanov Andrey, Crane Michael, Harrison Denise J, Holden William, Landrigan Philip J, Luft Benjamin J, Mocarelli Paolo, Mazitova Nailya, Melius James, Moline Jacqueline M, Mori Koji, Prezant David, Reibman Joan, Reissman Dori B, Stazharau Alexander, Takahashi Ken, Udasin Iris G, Todd Andrew C
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
BMC Public Health. 2017 Jan 7;17(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3939-3.
The disasters at Seveso, Three Mile Island, Bhopal, Chernobyl, the World Trade Center (WTC) and Fukushima had historic health and economic sequelae for large populations of workers, responders and community members.
Comparative data from these events were collected to derive indications for future preparedness. Information from the primary sources and a literature review addressed: i) exposure assessment; ii) exposed populations; iii) health surveillance; iv) follow-up and research outputs; v) observed physical and mental health effects; vi) treatment and benefits; and vii) outreach activities.
Exposure assessment was conducted in Seveso, Chernobyl and Fukushima, although none benefited from a timely or systematic strategy, yielding immediate and sequential measurements after the disaster. Identification of exposed subjects was overall underestimated. Health surveillance, treatment and follow-up research were implemented in Seveso, Chernobyl, Fukushima, and at the WTC, mostly focusing on the workers and responders, and to a lesser extent on residents. Exposure-related physical and mental health consequences were identified, indicating the need for a long-term health care of the affected populations. Fukushima has generated the largest scientific output so far, followed by the WTCHP and Chernobyl. Benefits programs and active outreach figured prominently in only the WTC Health Program. The analysis of these programs yielded the following lessons: 1) Know who was there; 2) Have public health input to the disaster response; 3) Collect health and needs data rapidly; 4) Take care of the affected; 5) Emergency preparedness; 6) Data driven, needs assessment, advocacy.
Given the long-lasting health consequences of natural and man-made disasters, health surveillance and treatment programs are critical for management of health conditions, and emergency preparedness plans are needed to prevent or minimize the impact of future threats.
塞韦索、三里岛、博帕尔、切尔诺贝利、世界贸易中心(世贸中心)和福岛的灾难给大量工人、应急人员和社区成员带来了具有历史意义的健康和经济后果。
收集这些事件的比较数据,以得出未来防范的指示。来自主要来源的信息和文献综述涉及:i)暴露评估;ii)暴露人群;iii)健康监测;iv)随访和研究成果;v)观察到的身心健康影响;vi)治疗和福利;vii)外展活动。
在塞韦索、切尔诺贝利和福岛进行了暴露评估,尽管这些评估都没有受益于及时或系统的策略,而是在灾难发生后进行了即时和连续的测量。暴露对象的识别总体上被低估了。在塞韦索、切尔诺贝利、福岛和世贸中心实施了健康监测、治疗和随访研究,主要关注工人和应急人员,对居民的关注程度较低。确定了与暴露相关的身心健康后果,表明需要对受影响人群进行长期医疗保健。福岛产生的科学成果最多,其次是世贸中心健康项目和切尔诺贝利。福利计划和积极的外展活动仅在世贸中心健康项目中显著。对这些项目的分析得出了以下经验教训:1)了解谁在那里;2)让公共卫生参与灾难应对;3)迅速收集健康和需求数据;4)照顾受影响的人;5)应急准备;6)以数据为驱动、需求评估、宣传倡导。
鉴于自然和人为灾难对健康的长期影响,健康监测和治疗项目对于健康状况的管理至关重要,需要制定应急准备计划以预防或尽量减少未来威胁的影响。