title: The Volendam fire: lessons learned from disaster research.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  After the Volendam fire, a multidisciplinary, integral evaluation, called the Medical Evaluation of the Disaster in Volendam (MERV), was established. This article is a discussion of disaster research methodology. It describes the organizational framework of this project and the methodological problems.
  
  
  METHODS
  A scientific steering group consisting of members from three hospitals prepared and guided the project. A research team wrote the final study protocol and performed the study. The project was funded by the Ministry of Health. The study protocol had a modular design in which each of the modules focused on one specific area or location. The main questions for each location were: (1) which treatment protocols were used; (2) what was the condition of the patient; and (3) was medical care provided according to existing protocols. After the fire, 241 victims were treated in hospitals; they all were included in the study. Most of the victims had burn injuries, and approximately one-third suffered from inhalation injury. All hospitals and ambulance services involved were visited in order to collect data, and interviewers obtained additional information. The government helped obtain permission for data-collection in three of the hospitals. Over 1,200 items of information about each patient and > 200,000 total items were collected. During data processing, the data were re-organized, categorized, and presented in a uniform and consistent style. A cross-sectional site analysis and a longitudinal patient analysis were conducted. This was facilitated by the use of several sub-databases. The modular approach made it possible to obtain a complete overview of the medical care provided. The project team was guided by a multidisciplinary steering group and the research was performed by a research team. This enabled the research team to focus on the scientific aspects.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The evaluation of the Volendam fire indicates that a project approach with a modular design is effective for the analysis of complex incidents. The use of several sub-databases makes it easy to combine findings and conduct cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. The government played an important role in the funding and support of the project. To limit and structure data collection and analysis, a pilot study based on several predefined main questions should be conducted. The questions then can be specified further based on the availability of data.
authors.affiliation: Zaans Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Koningin Julianaplein 58, Zaandam, The Netherlands. svanharten@hotmail.com
authors.forename: Sabine M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: van Harten
authors.forename: Joost J L M
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Bierens
authors.forename: Lieke
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Welling
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Patka
authors.forename: Robert W
authors.initials: RW
authors.lastname: Kreis
authors.forename: Maarten
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Boers
mesh_terms: D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004189:Disaster Planning; D005390:Fires; D006801:Humans; D009426:Netherlands; D012107:Research Design