Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:40:13.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Gujarat Earthquake (2001) Experience in a Seismically Unprepared Area: Community Hospital Medical Response

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Nobhojit Roy ,
Hemant Shah ,
Vikas Patel  and
R. Richard Coughlin
Nobhojit Roy*
Affiliation:
Scientific Officer and Consultant Surgeon, BARC Hospital, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
Hemant Shah
Affiliation:
Medical Superintendent and Surgeon, Gandhi-Lincoln Hospital, Deesa, Gujarat, India
Vikas Patel
Affiliation:
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
R. Richard Coughlin
Affiliation:
Associate Clinical Professor, Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
*
Scientific Officer and Consultant, Surgeon BARC Hospital, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India - 400094 E-mail: roy@archsfa.com or nobsroy@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

At 08:53 hours on 26 January 2001, an earthquake measuring 6.9 on the Richter scale devastated a large, drought-affected area of northwestern India, the state of Gujarat. The known number killed by the earthquake is 20,005, with 166,000 injured, of whom 20,717 were “seriously” injured. About 370,000 houses were destroyed, and another 922,000 were damaged.

Methods:

A community health worker using the local language interviewed all of the patients admitted to the Gandhi-Lincoln hospital with an on-site, oral, real-time, Victim Specific Questionnaire (VSQ).

Results:

The census showed a predominance of women, children, and young adults, with the average age being 28 years. The majority of the patients had other family members who were also injured (84%), but most had not experienced deaths among family members (86%). Most of the patients (91%) had traveled more than 200 kilometers using their family cars, pick-ups, trucks, or buses to reach the buffer zone hospitals. The daily hospital admission rate returned to pre-event levels five days after the event, and all of the hospital services were restored by nine days after the quake. Most of the patients (83%) received definitive treatment in the buffer zone hospitals; 7% were referred to tertiary-care centers; and 9% took discharge against medical advice.

The entrapped village folk with their traditional architecture had lesser injuries and a higher rescue rate than did the semi-urban townspeople, who were trapped in collapsed concrete masonry buildings and narrow alleys. However, at the time of crisis, aware townspeople were able to tap the available health resources better than were the poor. There was a low incidence of crush injuries. Volunteer doctors from various backgrounds teamed up to meet the medical crisis. International relief agencies working through local groups were more effective. Local relief groups needed to coordinate better. Disaster tourism by various well-meaning agencies took a toll on the providers. Many surgeries may have contributed to subsequent morbidity.

Conclusions:

The injury profile was similar to that reported for most other daytime earthquakes. Buffer zone treatment outcomes were better than were the field and damaged hospital outcomes.

Keywords

BhujGujaratIndiadisasterearthquakeinjury profilepre-parednessresponsemedical
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , December 2002 , pp. 186 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Government of India: Weekly Situation report No. 74 (20 March 2001) on 26th January 2001 Earthquake, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi.Google Scholar
2. Rajendran, K, Rajendran, CP, Thakkar, M, Tuttle, MP: The 2001 Kutch (Bhuj) earthquake: Coseismic surface features and their significance. Current Science 2001; 80: 1397–1405.Google Scholar
3. Koenig, KL, Dinerman, N, Kuehl, AE: Disaster nomenclature – A functional impact approach: The PICE system. Acad Emerg Med 1996; 3: 723–727.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Bhalodiya, HP, Pethani, DK, Modi, JV, Bhagat, SB: Crush syndrome in earthquake-affected patients. Gujarat Medical Journal 2002; 59: 45–48.Google Scholar
5. Angus, DC, Pretto, EA, Abrams, JI, Ceciliano, N, Watoh, Y, Kirimli, B, Certug, A, Comfort, LK: Epidemiologic assessment of mortality, building collapse pattern, and medical response after the 1992 earthquake in Turkey. Disaster Reanimatology Study Group (DRSG). Prehosp Disast Med 1997;12: 222–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Armenian, HK, Noji, EK, Oganesian, AP: A case-control study of injuries arising from the earthquake in Armenia, 1988. Bull World Health Organ 1992; 70: 251–257.Google ScholarPubMed
7. Armenian, HK, Melkonian, A, Noji, EK, Hovanesian, AP: Deaths and injuries due to the earthquake in Armenia: a cohort approach. Int J Epidemiol Aug 1997; 26: 806–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Noji, EK, Keleng, D, Armenian, HK, et al: The 1988 earthquake in Soviet Armenia: A case study. Ann Emerg Med 1990; 19:891–897.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Nakayama, S, Okada, N, Nakamura, M, Ohmori, Y, Takahashi, A, Tajika, M, Ishii, N: Experience in international relief activities for Gujarat 2001 in India. Prehosp Disast Med 2001;16:s52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Harris, G: India: Telemedicine's Great New Frontier. IEEE Spectrum April 2001; 16–17.Google Scholar
11. Schultz, CH, Koenig, KL, Noji, EK: A medical disaster response to reduce immediate mortality after an earthquake. New England Journal of Medicine 1996; 334: 438–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Shoaf, KI, Sareen, HR, Nguyen, LH, Bourque, LB: Injuries as a result of California earthquakes in the past decade. Disasters 1998; 22: 218–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Tanaka, H, Iwai, A, Oda, J, Kuwagata, Y, Matsuoka, T, Shimazu, T, Yoshioka, T: Overview of evacuation and transport of patients following the 1995 Hanshin-Awaji earthquake. J Emerg Med 1998; 16: 439–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Kuwagata, Y, Oda, J, Tanaka, H, Iwai, A, Matsuoka, T, Takaoka, M, Kishi, M, Morimoto, F, Ishikawa, K, Mizushima, Y, Nakata, Y, Yamamura, H, Hiraide, A, Shimazu, T, Yoshioka, T: Analysis of 2,702 traumatized patients in the 1995 Hanshin-Awaji earthquake. J Trauma 1997; 43: 427–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Peek-Asa, C, Kraus, JF, Bourque, LB, Vimalchandra, D, Yu, J, Abrams, J: Fatal and hospitalized injuries resulting from the 1994 Northridge earthquake. International Journal of Epidemiology 1998; 27: 459–465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Coupland, R. M.: Epidemiological approach to surgical management of the casualties of war. BMJ 1994; 308: 1693–1697.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Fawcett, W, Oliveira, CS: Casualty treatment after earthquake disasters: development of a regional simulation model. Disasters 2000; 24: 271–287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Tanaka, H, Oda, J, Iwai, A, Kuwagata, Y, Matsuoka, T, Takaoka, M, Kishi, M, Morimoto, F, Ishikawa, K, Mizushima, Y, Nakata, Y, Yamamura, H, Hiraide, A, Shimazu, T, Yoshioka, T: Morbidity and mortality of hospitalized patients after the 1995 Hanshin-Awaji earthquake. Am J Emerg Med Mar 1999; 17: 186–191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. McArthur, DL, Peek-Asa, C, Kraus, JF: Injury hospitalizations before and after the 1994 Northridge, California earthquake. Am J Emerg Med 2000; 18: 361–366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Armenian, HK, Melkonian, A, Noji, EK, Hovanesian, AP: Deaths and injuries due to the earthquake in Armenia: A cohort approach. Int J Epidemiol 1997; 26: 806–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Roy, N: Disaster tourism in Kutch. Issues in Medical Ethics 2001:9:60.Google Scholar
22. Peek-Asa, C, Ramirez, MR, Shoaf, K, Seligson, H, Kraus, JF: GIS mapping of earthquake-related deaths and hospital admissions from the 1994 Northridge, California, Earthquake. Ann Epidemiol 2000;10(1):5–13. Comment in: Ann Epidemiol. 2000; 10: 1–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Shoaf, KI, Peek-Asa, C: Survey research in disaster public health. Prehosp Disast Med 2000; 15: 57–63.Google ScholarPubMed