|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The LSU Experience | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The LSU Experience |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Command center The LSU Experience: Command Center Paula Drone Since I was tasked with setting up an animal shelter for owned animals, I was totally taken by surprise when I was suddenly Incident Commander. I was quickly schooled about the Incident Command System (ICS) and belatedly set up our command structure with lots of help. I soon learned that meetings were a big part of IC. I was overwhelmed from the start but I had a great support group. The LSU AG Center had a meeting room, which was one of the few rooms with AC, and this became our headquarters and command. We had to bring in everything for communications and Internet access. The command room became our information storage room as well. We not only had our staff meetings there but also had briefings for new groups of veterinarians and veterinary technicians. We also had our computer people working in command. The command room was also used to cool off in. As the shelter grew in size so did our need for additional help in all areas. What was amazing was the response. As a need was identified, someone would come forward to meet the challenge. The LSU School of Veterinary Medicine was the backbone of the structure of IC. The SVM not only provided people and expertise but also necessary contacts for supplies and personnel. It was truly an awesome experience to work with so many inspired individuals who gave so much of their time and experience to help others. The LSU Experience: Animal operations Andrea Flores I served as operations manager of the Parker Coliseum from September 3 till the shelter closed on October 17. Operations became progressively larger as the shelter grew to the point where it was difficult to address all areas. The LSU Ag Center’s Parker Coliseum facility lent itself quite well to our purpose and allowed appropriate separation of species. Small were separated from large dogs and cats were housed away from dogs. There was a paucity of air-conditioned space so we were limited in our ability to house some obese animals, birds and exotic animals.
During the early operation of the shelter, the lights were on 24/7 as we continued to take in animals constantly day and night. This constant disturbance may have contributed to stress and aggression. We adopted the following schedule of activity to address this issue.
Once this schedule was established, a definite change in animal behavior was noticed. Security was an issue with pet theft high on the list. The adopted schedule assisted in personnel control by reducing access during the quiet times and at night. A perimeter fence was built around the barn but construction was delayed by 2 weeks because of the shortage of contractors. In the general widespread disaster, materials and workers were hard to come by. Serious consideration should be given to security from the beginning. Daily operations ran more smoothly once the command system was set up. The barn and the arena were set up in such a way that this was a lot easier to achieve. The system was as follows with each animal zone having the following staff: Area Manager: This person was ultimately responsible for the care of every animal in his/her zone. They assigned tasks to volunteers and served as the “go to” person in their zone. Ideally they should have work a distinctive colored shirt for easy recognition, but this seemed hard to achieve. Incoming veterinary and lay volunteers were directed to them for assignment and they could provide owners with information as well. Ideally this role was taken by a veterinarian or veterinary technician because there were usually several animals that needed medical attention in each zone. In all areas, it would have been ideal to have at least two people in this role. However, we did not have sufficient manpower to achieve this. Information desk: This was set up in both the barn and the arena. It was never achieved with the cat area. This desk maintained all records and information on pets in their zone. Desk staff directed owners to their pets when they visited. Medical Staff: Veterinarians and veterinarian technicians were assigned to treatment and diagnosis where necessary, vaccination, ecto- and endoparasite control, microchipping and handling aggressive animals. Many animals became unkempt or arrived in that state so grooming and kennel washing areas were established. Professional groomers volunteered to assist. Safety issues were a major problem. The main areas of concern were in the electrical wiring and proper handling of the quarternary ammonium compounds used to disinfect the cages during the cleaning process. Protective clothing, strict adherence to the Material Safety and Data Sheets MSDSs, and delivery through an automatic in-line mixer helped to solve many of the issues. Calculation of manpower requirements was difficult because we always seemed to have a moving target both in the number of people we would need and the skill sets we required. Many volunteers had to serve in positions well outside their normal comfort zone. We did not have specific written job descriptions for staff positions so casual volunteers tended to go off task and wander through the shelter to do something more to their liking or to look at and pet the animals. This increased the total manpower requirement. In all positions throughout the shelter at all times training was essential. Our workforce was ever changing and institutional knowledge was hard to establish and maintain. Communications were a problem at several levels. The establishment of a easy-to-use walkie-talkie style communication system throughout the shelter was a long time in coming but it really eased the operation of the shelter once it was procured and programmed. The effective communication of ever changing policy from the command center to the workers on the floor also proved difficult because policy changed so often and so did the staff. A person who went away for a couple of days them came back to help would have to adapt to a new set of rules. As operations manager, it was hard for me to find time to meet effectively with my immediate staff. However, we found time to do this on occasion when clear communication to all at once concerning changes in policy and impending events (shipping) needed to be disseminated. Jim Roberts Years ago I worked with a colleague whose mantra was: I’d rather be lucky than good. My assessment of safety at the Emergency Animal Shelter (EAS) is that we were more lucky than safe. The good news is that safety at the EAS became better over time. We now have an opportunity to plan for a much safer EAS if one is needed in the future. Safety is defined as freedom from harm (physical injury). By minimizing or reducing the risk of exposure to hazardous situations, an acceptable degree of safely can be achieved. The key is to (1) identity hazards and (2) mitigate their exposure to shelter personnel. This requires a safety training program to be written before the next EAS is opened. I believe a look back at the EAS at LSU AgCenter’s Parker Coliseum and a look forward to future EAS operations is prudent.
Retrospective:
Prospective: Effective safety prevention and management requires (1) a people first policy, (2) an effective safety management organization, and (3) an effective safety training program. If the mission of any EAS is the safety and welfare of the animals in its care, then the safety of EAS personnel must be assured in order to accomplish the mission. An effective safety management organization as defined in Figure 1 requires a close, active working relationship between four positions. The incident commander (or his/her designee), the facility manager, LSU (OES/SVM) Safety, and dedicated on-site safety personnel (volunteers) work together to implement the safety training program as designed by LSU Safety. The dedicated on-site safety personnel are tasked to (1) conduct on-going safety orientation sessions for all EAS personnel, (2) conduct a daily safety inspection of EAS operations with the facility manager, (3) monitor volunteers, and (4) train their (safety) replacements when necessary. Figure 1 LSU-EAS Safety Management Organization
Karla Clark Upon admission, owners should be asked if they wish to give their animal up for adoption. If they do not sign a release at the time of intake, they should be provided with a release form and instructions on how (fax #, mailing address, etc.) to submit the release and to give all other necessary information (impound ticket, copy of driver’s license, etc.) to the shelter in the future if they change their Foster days should be regular events and owners and potential fosters should be made aware of the dates and times of these events. The more animals fostered the more animals that can be received into the shelter and the fewer animals the shelter will have to care for. Adoptions should ideally not be carried out locally. If a professional staff is acquired from the start and made aware that there will be no adoptions from the outset there should not be a large number of volunteers who attach themselves to an animal and threaten to quit if they are unable to adopt. It would be helpful to allay the fears of the staff if those in charge of choosing shelters for the animals to be moved to, made it a requirement that those shelters agree not to euthanize animals in their shelter to make room for disaster victims and also agree not to euthanize animals received from the disaster area except under limited conditions of failed health or extreme behavioral problems. There were simply too many people with access to the database and enough outlets to access the database. One person simply is not enough to fill a 12-hour shift 7 days a week Communication issues:
Screening potential adopters was not challenging as most volunteers were good applicants, but we could have done with fewer “recommendations” from the veterinarians on staff. While a hard working volunteer today may look like a good applicant, many of the veterinarians weren’t asking the questions necessary to ascertain if they would be the right home for the particular animal they wished to adopt. Adoption counselors should be made aware of any behavioral or medical issues for any animal that is to be adopted locally. There was a lack of information in the database about the animals to be adopted, particularly those that were housed in the “will bite” section, had health problems, were considered an aggressive animal, or were a potentially aggressive breed, etc. Screening would benefit from more detailed information about the animals’ medical and behavioral characteristics and inclusion of this information in the database or at least in hardcopy form in their file. A detailed questionnaire about the animals should be filled out by the owner upon intake. A behaviorist should be available to temperament test any animals deemed available for adoption if there is any question as to their fitness. Pit bulls and pit bull mixes, over a year of age, especially intact animals and animals whose history is not clear, should not be adopted out locally without prior temperament testing. Too much time spent explaining/justifying the decisions of command to volunteers. LSU Experience: Animal health issues Dr. David Senior The main problems encountered were heat stress and heat stroke; eye irritation; stress; induced aggressiveness; gastrointestinal upsets; and fleas. The heat stress was obvious on admission and obese animals were the most severely affected. There were some obese animals that could not survive out of air-conditioned space and we assumed that they had probably never been outside for any length of time in the summer in Louisiana. In most cases the affected animals just needed to be given IV fluids, dampened and placed in an air-conditioned environment with a fan blowing at them for a few hours. The cause of the eye irritation was never quite clear but it was very common. It responded to medication with ophthalmic ointment or benign neglect. In depth diagnostics were not performed. An unusual number of animals appeared to be aggressive when entering the shelter and some continued with this behavior. After a few days of operating 24/7 with the lights blazing the whole time, we realized that the animals were not getting any rest time. Eventually, the facility was closed to accession at night after 10:00 p.m. and a “quiet time” was instituted between noon and 5:00 p.m. when the lights were turned off and all animal care and walking ceased. This seemed to help settle the animals down. Gastrointestinal upsets were present and to some extent may have been exacerbated by changing the food on a daily basis. It was determined that we should change the diet to only one type: a low-residue “intestinal” diet and volunteers were asked not to overfeed, a plea that largely was ignored. The switch to a standardized diet seemed to help. Flea control on admission to the facility was lax because of heavy burdens on incoming animals and poorly instituted point-of-entry flea treatment protocols. This resulted in the emergence of a heavy flea infestation at 5-6 weeks after the shelter was opened, particularly in the barn area. Animals were treated for fleas as they went home or were shipped to distant shelters. The dirt ground cover in the arena and barn areas had to be replaced. One animal succumbed to electrocution after biting an electrical cord. Exposure to this preventable hazard was subsequently reduced by adherence to appropriate electrical wiring safety setups. Conduits were used wherever possible to distribute electrical power. Wiring was taped off the ground and out of reach. At least two dogs suffered gastric volvulus and torsion and subsequently died or were euthanized. In addition, because the shelter system handled over 2,000 animals taken in unselectively, a wide spectrum of chronic disease was prevalent – some already under treatment from their owners and some pre-existing but diagnosed at the shelter. Several animals with diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure and nephritic syndrome were maintained. Some animals were at the beginning of their lives (several litters were born in the shelter) and some were at the end of their lives (a couple of animals were euthanized because of overwhelming disease). At no time was a syndrome recognized that could be attributed to exposure to contaminated water in the flooded areas, at least for the 6-week life of the shelter. The LSU Experience: Animal shipping Susan Mikota DVM, Barb Petty, and Katy Vernon What worked We had a great team that pulled together to learn regulations, develop forms and protocols and respond to the myriad of tasks necessary to arrange transfer of animals to remote shelters. Each team member was willing to do whatever was needed to be done to accomplish our shared goal of getting the animals safely to their destination. We received tremendous logistical support from the International Fund for Animal Welfare staff and from the USDA, Animal Care, whose representative was familiar with pertinent regulations and procedures. Transportation of animals from the Emergency Animal Shelter (EAS) was done by USDA registrants. Their trailers or trucks had ventilation, lighting, and indicators in the towing vehicle. Personnel were trained to observe animals at a minimum of 4 hours. The crates used to contain the dogs were the plastic “sky kennel” or “pet porter” styles. All crates were selected according to the size of the dog or cat (dogs were measured for length and height). Crates for dogs had a thick layer (1.5 inches) of pine shavings and crates for cats had absorbable bedding of ¼ inch corn cob or recycled newspaper or cardboard that had been processed for litter box use (e.g. yesterday’s news). Crate sizes for dogs and cats were selected to provide sufficient space for animals to stand, sit or turn around. All cats were in 22” crates so they would have sufficient space to stand, sit, or turn around. It was reported back that the cats arrived at their destination in much better condition than if they had been in the small crates that the shelters had planned to use. All crates had a sipper-type water receptacle for constant water supply. The sippers were triggered when the animal was placed in the crate. Bowls and fresh water were sent with the animals in case they appeared to need water and could not figure out the sipper. (Most of the transport times were less than 12 hours.) Dogs capable of chewing through transport containers were double crated. The sky kennel container was placed inside a wire crate for added security. LIVE ANIMAL labels were clearly attached to the transport containers. Each animal’s identification number was clearly written on the container to facilitate matching of the animal’s record with the container and the animal to reduce animal handling. Documentation containing destination contact information and a statement that live animals were on board was clearly posted in the cab of the vehicle. A copy of each animal’s shelter record was enclosed in a plastic zipper style bag with the animal’s identification number and photograph clearly visible. Medication, if any, was also in the bag. The zipper bags containing animal records were packed together in numerical order rather than attached individually to transport containers to prevent potential separation and loss. Animal loading was accomplished using an assembly line format. The set up varied from shipment to shipment. The cat loading protocol was carried out with as few steps as possible to reduce stress to the animals. The cat was carried to a table, the microchip number was verified and the photograph was matched, a paper collar with the cat’s ID number was attached to the animal, and the cat was placed in the transport container. Attaching the paper collar was controversial because of the possibility that a cat might lick the collar into a dangerous position over its lower jaw, but we felt it was important that each animal wear an identification number. All cats arrived without injury. Dog loading required a larger space and multiple stations, each manned by a volunteer. This technique was chosen to provide exercise for the dogs prior to crating. Handlers, each carrying the transport copy of the record, walked the dogs, one at a time with ample space between, from the shelter crate through the stations until they reached the transport crate. Water was available to the dogs along the route. Station functions included microchip and photograph verification, ID collar attachment, outdoor exercise, administration of Capstar (not done on all shipments), and crating. Each animal’s microchip was checked a second time at the transport crate to verify that animals did not get out of order during the process. Loading was scheduled to be done at night for three reasons: 1) the cooler temperatures were less stressful for the animals (and the people), 2) the loading process did not interfere with daily shelter operations, and 3) it provided a lower profile which was important because some people were not supportive of the decision to ship the animals out of the state. Challenges Transport: Transport of live animals is not as simple as putting an animal in a kennel and then on a truck. We strived to follow the guidelines established in the Animal Welfare Act (see Animal Shipping, Forms, Protocols, and SOPs). We also summarized minimum transportation standards and included these as an addendum to our shelter contract when we thought that receiving shelters would arrange transport. In reality we arranged transport in most cases. Although this was more work, in the end it was for the best, as most receiving shelters were unaware of regulations, had unrealistic assessments of the number of animals their vehicles could hold (making it difficult for us to plan), or offered to move animals in vehicles such as horse trailers which were deemed unacceptable by our State Veterinarian. Although a serious effort was made to comply with the AWA transportation standards, a common problem was the ability to easily observe or easily remove animals in case of emergency. We computer-mapped the dimensions of the trailer truck and the sizes of kennels and still ended up with very little space in between the crates facing each other. It should be understood that the Animal Welfare Act also licenses and regulates intermediate handlers (drivers) who must follow rules or risk fines or license revocation. The Department of Transportation (DOT) also comes into play. By law (current as of this writing), a single commercial driver
These regulations can make it difficult even for licensed carriers who want to help. In many cases agreeing to transport animals from a disaster area may mean turning down other (paid) business. Having funds available for transport is advisable. The 11-hour rule also impacted our planning as we did not want already stressed animals to remain in transport vehicles any longer than necessary. In some situations where remote shelters were in excess of an 11-hour driving distance, we arranged for two drivers so that there would be no lay-overs. Current regulations are on the DOT website: www.dot.gov. Although the Emergency Animal Shelter had established a final pick-up date for owners to re-claim their animals, a large number of people requested extensions – some as long as two weeks past the “final” date. This made it almost impossible to sanely plan for transport to new shelters as the numbers of animals needing placement changed daily and we never really knew if the people who requested extensions would really come and claim their animals. This was compounded by a decision to allow local fostering and contingent adoptions which further confused the count of animals needing placement. Identifying shelters: Many shelters offered assistance and we had more leads than we could respond to. Some shelters had restrictions based on available facilities (e.g. only able to take cats or small dogs) or shelter policy (e.g. “no pit bulls”). The latter was common and this breed was the most difficult to place. Some shelters requested behavioral evaluations which we tried to accommodate by separating out hard-to-handle animals and flagging behavioral issues on the Special Needs form. Names of potential shelters (and rescue groups) were sent to the ASPCA for screening which slowed the process but gave us confidence that we were sending these pets to reputable organizations. Contracts: Developing the contracts was very time-consuming. These must have legal wording and approval. In our case IFAW helped by having their lawyers review and revise our draft documents. Records: In an attempt to be thorough our record system contained a lot of duplicate information. For example, we had rabies vaccination information in 5 places. The records could be streamlined to avoid these redundancies. If enough computers are available direct electronic record entry may save time and prevent lost records Record forms should be developed with fields that will facilitate later data analysis (types of medical problems treated, for example). What could be improved A written disaster response plan is essential. The following items related to shipping animals to remote shelters should be included in this document:
One shipping experience was chaotic. There were too many people trying to help and no clear job assignments. There was a lot of noise and the disorganization added to the stress of the animals. We learned a lot from that event and recommend a debriefing after each shipment. Shipments which went more smoothly utilized the following recommendations:
The cat loading protocol should be carried out in a small enclosed space if possible to prevent escape. LSU Experience: Public health issues summary Dr. David Senior The most important public health issues in the shelter were animal bites, mental health issues and heat exhaustion. The animal bites were handled with first aid and additional medical attention where necessary with standard documentation and an animal hold for 10 days. When owners wanted to take their animals, we requested that they present their animal to a veterinarian at the end of the 10 day “quarantine” period. The extent to which they complied was not determined. Mental health issues were not addressed very effectively. Although there was a great need for mental health support among the owners of animals, particularly the owners of missing animals, we also needed support for shelter staff. People were very stressed and emotionally affected by the overall massiveness of the displacement and “refugee” atmosphere and dealing with suffering people on a daily basis was wearing. Lack of effective delivery could have had several causes: We did not always have services; people did not know when and where to access the services; not all people know when they need help; and not all people turn for such services even if they know they need the help. In some isolated instances, the mental health services personnel created more stress in shelter staff by regaling “war stories” from other areas of the rescue effort and the shelter management had requests to remove them. This relates to lack of experience among the mental health workers and maybe failure to recognize that many people were on edge, not only animal owners displaced from New Orleans. The main working areas of the shelter were not air-conditioned and ambient temperature during the day in this environment approached 95-100 degrees F with 90% humidity. For heat exhaustion, all veterinary staff were advised to drink lots of water and to take frequent breaks. Not all followed this advice and we had several instances of people who had to stop work for a period of time or who had some trouble recovering after they left Louisiana at the end of their service period. Individuals who were obviously pushing themselves to a dangerous limit were counseled but not all took the advice. The LSU Experience: Public health considerations Victoria Hampshire, VMD, USPHS Veterinary Category Disclaimer: The contents of this submission are interpretive, advisory in nature, and based on the experiences of Victoria Hampshire, VMD during deployment to the LSU AgCenter’s Parker Coliseum. These recommendations do not constitute an official PHS or FDA recommendation. Introduction: Human and animal public health service concerns at an emergency animal shelter are important to the operational success of the facility and involve core support activities without which other more sophisticated medical and veterinary measures cannot be reasonably expected to function. To some degree, the provision of measures intended to reduce risks of public health overlap with other critical functions of the shelter. These critical functions involve sanitation; the provision of potable water, basic sustenance for animals and their caregivers; opportunities for social and environmental enrichment; opportunities for postural adjustment in caged animals and prevention of postural injuries to humans caring for them; reduction of opportunities for disease transmission; protection of physical and mental health (humans and animals); proper ventilation and heating; control of vicious animal attacks; mitigation of biohazards; appropriate training of facility personnel; and promotion of opportunities for bettering future activities of this sort. These functions fall into two major areas: sanitation and protection of human and animal physical and mental health. Task I. Sanitation: The function of sanitization is to prevent occupational disease hazards and to maintain an orderly work place that is capable of being maintained in a cleanly manner. The operational needs of a sanitization program are 1) control of sanitization personnel, command and control of facilities engineers, 2) regular and routine attention to clutter and waste removal, and 3) appropriate receptacles that are user-friendly. Action Item 1: Request for PHS assistance from the Louisiana state veterinarian Responsible Party: LSU Incident Commander: Request assistance from the LSU state veterinarian in the form of a request to Homeland Security to provide the following PHS officers who will report to the LSU incident command: 1. 3 full time PHS veterinarians experienced in biomedical research facility support (20,000 square foot facility or bigger) 2. 2 full time PHS engineers with experience in facility engineering 3. 1 full time PHS medical officer or R.N. to manage the occupational health issues. Action Item 2: Develop and fund contracts now for dedicated janitors to clean central areas, remove waste, and operate the cage wash. Check contract expiration dates and renew appropriately. Ensure that the PHS veterinary command has project officer status on the contract. Responsible Party: LSU Incident Commander o 18 janitors needed daily o Janitors report to PHS facility veterinary staff o Equipment needs: Purchase 50 large garbage containers on wheels o Ensure large dumpster emptied daily o The contract should ensure that the contractor supplies materials such as sponges, disinfectants o Pressurized hoses for back loading dock cage wash Action Item 3: Streamline and Neaten Animal Husbandry Responsible Party: PHS Veterinarians: ü Train volunteers in the arena to fill buckets, not individual water bowls ü Instruct volunteers to bathe dogs outside in the cage wash area, not on dirt floors ü Provide oversight to contract (or volunteer if contract not possible) sanitization staff on organization and cleaning/restocking of Rubbermaid carts and: o The regular and routine organization of these carts with the following items: § Pooper scooper and garbage bag for scooped bedding § Feed and water receptacles § Watering can for dispensing water to dangerous dogs through the cage irons § Several leashes ü Centralize feeding stations ü Work with volunteers to arrange storage of bulk inventory in seating areas upstairs out of the way of traffic freeing the aisles for foot traffic Things to do in advance: Acquire stainless steel bucket-type watering receptacles that hang on barn stalls (therefore cannot be tipped over) ü Acquisition of lixit-type waters for caged animals (learning period necessary but helpful in limiting hauled water) ü Acquire large garbage carts (big Rubbermaid wheelbarrows) The barn and arena should each have two large Rubbermaid wheelbarrows
o
TASK II: Protection of physical and mental health (humans and animals) Operational Needs: Interface
between LSU command, LSU veterinarians, and animal Responsible Parties: PHS medical
officer, PHS engineers, PHS veterinarians, LSU Staffing Requirements: PHS vets, engineers, medical officers, volunteer staff, supplemental engineers from LSU or contract Equipment Needs: Fans, PVC pipes (half-inch, 800 linear feet) for electrical cord coverage, 800 linear feet of ¼ inch for additional plumbing or hose needs), electrical cords (100 20-foot, 20 100-foot), coolers, 2 treatment carts, rabies poles, small tent, medical records, bite records ü Work with facility engineers to organize, hang/distribute fans for all animal areas ü Provision/arrangement of PVC housing for electrical cords ü Establish centrally located private (in terms of location) PHS medical clinic ü Establish location of food, drink and interface with LSU command on food/drink supplier. ü Follow state and local requirements for recording and reporting dog and cat bite injuries. ü Working with LSU veterinarians, establish rest periods for animals ü Consulting with LSU veterinarians, minimize non-critical treatments to SID ü Minimize walking of large and/or mildly aggressive dogs if they are already housed in a stall. ü Create daily supply list for LSU command ü Develop and follow SOP for handling aggressive dogs ü Provide clinical care to dogs and cats in the event local and VMAT veterinary help is insufficient. Table I. Organization of Duties to Protect Public Health at LSU-EAS
Dr. Susan Eddelstone and Dr. Heather Jan Triage operated as a general practice. Patients were examined on admission, lab work was performed if needed, and a diagnosis and treatment plan were formulated. Veterinarians, assisted by technicians, performed exams and SOAPs * daily on all patients Treatments were altered as needed. Patient rounds were conducted between shift changes. Patients needing further diagnostic testing (radiographs, ultrasound), surgery or intensive care were transferred to LSU-SVM. Veterinarians made a list of needed supplies and drugs and gave to triage coordinator daily. Clean up of the area was performed by both veterinarians and technicians. * SOAP: subjective, objective, assessment, plan; this is a standard format for veterinary record-keeping Things that went well: · A few veterinarians who were in triage for a long period of time organized the unit to be very functional and efficient. Prior to this time, the lack of continuity and lack of a triage coordinator prohibited a consistent operation and often caused confusion for the veterinarians and others involved in transfers, etc. · Patients were effectively treated and sent back to the arena or barn. Few patients were transferred to LSU once the triage unit was in full operation. · Veterinary students volunteering or performing duty on a disaster medicine rotation were excellent technicians and often were taught about diseases and treatments by the veterinarians – a great learning experience for the students and exposure to many different veterinarians from around the country. Things that could be improved: · Scheduling of DVMs from day 1. Need continuity with veterinarians so that procedures are followed and the triage unit is run smoothly. · Equipment available sooner. This could be addressed with a mobile veterinary unit. · Larger supplies of drugs. Drugs, supplies and equipment initially were obtained from LSU-SVM hospital and LSU-SVM pharmacy which was difficult due to the limited supplies. Need to have representatives of drug companies contacted early or another plan such as access to stored supplies and drugs on day 1. · Organization of supplies delivered to the shelter. Should be by need and not accept anything. Too much to ship out at the end and clutters the triage and hallways. · Coordinators working 12 hour shifts 24/7 to log in, receive, and stock supplies so there is always a current inventory and supplies are clearly organized and accessible. Many supplies arrived in the middle of the night. · Establishing standard medical record forms early on. Forms should be clear and simple and self-explanatory to new vets coming in. A protocol for record handling should be developed and posted to avoid records being misplaced or lost. Misplaced records were a problem at the shelter. · Secretarial support to assist with communications with owners. · Have student participation a regular event in either a disaster class or as part of the medicine and surgery clinic rotations. · Better communication with LSU-SVM by having a representative come to the meetings. Transfer of patients usually went well but occasionally was met by resistance due to lack of understanding of funding available for the treatment and how far to go with diagnostics and treatment without owner funding. · Volunteers working 12 hour shifts to help with bathing and shave-downs. Innovations: · Veterinarians had their own sources (representatives of drug companies or animal hospitals around the country) to order supplies and drugs which allowed larger supplies of drugs to be obtained. · < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rubbermaid agricultural cart:
Suggest
acquisition of portable tanks of water so that volunteers can go down an
aisle with a hose and fill bowls mounted on the side of the barn.
These 3 gallon sprayers work nicely for portable water delivery and the
long handle is nice for filling the bowls from outside the cage or stall.
Northern Tool: