Skip to main content
Emergency Medicine Journal : EMJ logoLink to Emergency Medicine Journal : EMJ
. 2002 Sep;19(5):453–457. doi: 10.1136/emj.19.5.453

Facilities for chemical decontamination in accident and emergency departments in the United Kingdom

G George 1, K Ramsay 1, M Rochester 1, R Seah 1, H Spencer 1, D Vijayasankar 1, L Vasicuro 1
PMCID: PMC1725937  PMID: 12205006

Abstract

Objective: To audit the facilities for chemical decontamination, with special reference to cyanide poisoning, in all major accident and emergency departments in the UK.

Method: A simple postal questionnaire was used to audit planning, premises, equipment, protection for staff, and stocks of specific antidotes to cyanide poisoning.

Results: 227 questionnaires from 261 departments (87%) were returned and used in the survey. Of the 227 departments who responded, 151 (66%) had a written plan; 168 (74%) departments had premises for decontamination; 55 (24%) were judged to have satisfactory premises; 146 (64%) departments had a shower or hose for decontamination; 60 (26%) departments had a decontamination trolley suitable for "stretcher" patients; 203 (89%) had some protective equipment for staff but only 77 (34%) had complete protection—that is, goggles, chemical resistant clothing, and breathing apparatus. In the authors' opinion only seven (3%) departments had satisfactory premises and equipment to treat "stretcher" patients and full protection for staff. A further 11 (5%) departments were equipped to manage ambulant patients at a similar level. Some 205 (90%) departments stocked one or more antidotes to cyanide and 77 (34%) stocked all four antidotes. Thirty four (15%) departments held all four antidotes to cyanide and had full protection for staff. Only five (2%) departments had satisfactory premises and equipment to treat "stretcher" patients, full protection for staff, and at least three of four antidotes.

Conclusions: Most departments had some equipment for chemical decontamination. However, there were major inconsistencies in the range of equipment held and these limited its usefulness. Only a small minority of departments was satisfactorily equipped to deal with a serious chemical incident.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (151.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Burgess J. L., Blackmon G. M., Brodkin C. A., Robertson W. O. Hospital preparedness for hazardous materials incidents and treatment of contaminated patients. West J Med. 1997 Dec;167(6):387–391. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cone D. C., Davidson S. J. Hazardous materials preparedness in the emergency department. Prehosp Emerg Care. 1997 Apr-Jun;1(2):85–90. doi: 10.1080/10903129708958794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Horby P., Murray V., Cummins A., Mackway-Jones K., Euripidou R. The capability of accident and emergency departments to safely decontaminate victims of chemical incidents. J Accid Emerg Med. 2000 Sep;17(5):344–347. doi: 10.1136/emj.17.5.344. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Totenhofer R. I., Kierce M. It's a disaster: emergency departments' preparation for a chemical incident or disaster. Accid Emerg Nurs. 1999 Jul;7(3):141–147. doi: 10.1016/s0965-2302(99)80073-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

[Questionnaire]
emermedj_19_5_453__1.pdf (96.3KB, pdf)

Articles from Emergency Medicine Journal : EMJ are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES