Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T19:53:12.969Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Health Sector Response to the 2015 Earthquake in Nepal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 May 2018

Shiva Subedi*
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, Center for Research on Health Care in Disasters, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
Guna Nidhi Sharma
Affiliation:
Epidemiology and Disaster Management Section, Department of Health Services, Ministry of Health, Teku, Kathmandu, Nepal
Sagar Dahal
Affiliation:
Nepal Health Sector Reform Section, Ministry of Health, Kathmandu, Nepal
Megha Raj Banjara
Affiliation:
Central Department of Microbiology, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal
Basu Dev Pandey
Affiliation:
Department of Health Services, Ministry of Health, Kathmandu, Nepal
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to Shiva Subedi, Immunization Section, Child Health Division, Department of Health Services, Teku Road, Teku, Kathmandu, Nepal (email: ssubedi2011@gmail.com).
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In April 2015, Nepal experienced an earthquake of a magnitude of 7.6 on the Richter scale that resulted in deaths, morbidities, and infrastructure damage. In the post-earthquake period, 4 different workshops and a national “Lessons Learnt” conference were organized to assess the adequacy of the preparedness and response of the health sector. This article summarizes the main conclusions of these discussions relating to leadership, timely search and rescue, referral operations, medical relief to response activities, awareness campaigns, and support from the national and international levels, and epidemiological surveillance. The earthquake response was channeled through rapid response teams that spanned from the community level to the central level via a cluster coordination approach. Overall, the health sector’s response was concluded to be largely satisfactory because it focused not only on emergency medical care, but also on the resumption of basic health services and preventive health care (eg, hygiene, risk communication) equally. Post-disaster disease outbreak did not occur because effective surveillance and outbreak monitoring was one of the priority actions. However, services related to birthing centers, neonatal services, and vaccinations were impeded in some rural areas. Some weaknesses in planning, coordination, and management were also noted. The lessons learned can provide the impetus to strengthen future preparedness and response mechanisms. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:543–547)

Information

Type
Report from the Field
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Inc. 2018 
Figure 0

Figure 1Categories of Earthquake Affected Districts. Source: National Planning Commission3 (map prepared by Dr Bhagawat Rimal).

Figure 1

Figure 2A Prototype Map of a Hub-Hospital.