To Örebro University

Hospitals need to be fully operative during disasters. It is therefore essential to be able to evaluate hospital preparedness. However, there is no consensus of a standardized, comprehensive and reliable tool with which to measure hospital preparedness. The aim of the current study was to perform a systematic review of evaluation tools for hospital disaster preparedness. A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The key words "crisis," "disaster," "disaster medicine," "emergency," "mass casualty," "hospital preparedness," "hospital readiness," "hospital assessment," "hospital evaluation," "hospital appraisal," "planning," "checklist," and "medical facility" were used in combination with the Boolean operators "OR" and "AND." PubMed (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD), ISI Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY), and Scopus (Elsevier, New York, NY) were searched. A total of 51,809 publications were screened. The following themes were required for relevance: logistics, planning, human resources, triage, communication, command and control, structural and nonstructural preparedness, training, evacuation, recovery after disaster, coordination, transportation, surge capacity, and safety. The results from 15 publications are presented. Fifteen articles fulfilled the criteria of relevance and considered at least 1 of the 14 predetermined themes. None of the evaluated checklists and tools included all dimensions required for an appropriate hospital preparedness evaluation. The results of the current systematic review could be used as a basis for designing an evaluation tool for hospital disaster preparedness.