Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CPHP
Center for Public Health Preparedness Columbia University
NCDP
National Center for Disaster PreparednessColumbia University
Lecture Outline
Introduction
Human behavior in emergencies High rise building emergenciesconsiderations Background- recent high rise emergencies
3. 4.
Implications
If the behavior is the same as non-high rise emergencies, does it have utility in a high rise situation? If not, can the behavior be changed? If the planning is the same as for occupants of low-rise buildings, is it effective? If not, can it be changed?
Background
High Rise Emergencies
WTC, 1993 Oklahoma City, Murrah Building, 1995 Chicago High Rise Fires, 2003, 2004 WTC, 2001
11
13
15
WTC, 2001
North Tower Impact 8:46am 767, 10K gallons Impact at 94-98th floors Collapsed 1 hour and 42 minutes after impact South Tower Impact 9:02am 767, 10K gallons Impact at 79-84th floors Collapsed 57 minutes after impact
16
North
WTC Complex
South
17
WTC, 2001
18
20
Colleagues
Kristine Qureshi, RN, DNSc Martin Sherman, PhD Marcie Rubin, MPH, MPA
22
Knowledge
Behavioral Intentions
Evacuation Behaviors
23
Preparation of Reports
24
Outcome Variables
Decision to evacuate Began to evacuate Reached the street level (Rate of evacuation= minutes per floor) Injuries (physical and psychological) Long term health impact
25
Independent Variables
Individual
Pre-event health status, peri-event sensory input, familiarity with building, prior experiences, knowledge, subjective norm, delaying activities, post-event experiences and treatment
Organizational
Preplanning, emergency preparedness climate, leadership Risk communication
Structural
Egress factors Communication infrastructure
26
27
16% said their disability affected their ability to walk down large number of stairs
28
Number of Participants
30
Communication
39% could not hear or recall ANY PA system announcements 26% reported false alarms once a month or more
34
First became aware Made decision to leave Began to leave Reached street level
8:00 a.m.
8:46 a.m.
8:55 a.m.
9:02 a.m.
9:59 a.m.
10:28 a.m.
11:00 a.m.
35
Organizational level
leadership decision-making
Began to evacuate
Individual level:
delaying activities - two or more led to statistically significant delays in initiation
Peri-Event Experiences
60% 26% 30% 9% 9% 5% overcrowding smoke/dust water locked doors light fire/intense heat
37
39
41
42
50% did not immediately leave the area 36% stopped to see what was happening 26% looked for friends/co-workers 15% looked for a phone 14% did not know where to go
43
Preliminary Recommendations
Delineation of responsibilities Coordination/pre-planning with local agencies Communication systems Written plans, policies that target full evacuation if necessary Training, mandatory, new, annual, and orientation Specific preplanning for people with disabilities Drills to include stairwells, especially transfer hallways Evacuation drills - at least partial, leaders chosen with experience
45
Preliminary Recommendations
Inform:
Building owners, leaseholders, employees Code development Building design Regulatory compliance Emergency planners Other stakeholders
46
Next Steps
Develop and evaluate model evacuation plans, focus on the buildings safety leadership [NYC Code: Evacuation Action Plan Directors] Foster familiarity with stairwell environmentbuilding occupants Widespread dissemination to reach all stakeholders Spring meeting for all WTC employees and family members Fall 2006 NYC meeting for all stakeholders
47
Next Steps
Stakeholders Building owners, managers, leaseholders, employees Code developers Building designers Emergency planner
48
http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/sph/CPHP/wtc.htm
49