Chemical–biological–radiological (CBR) response: a template for hospital emergency departments

Antony Nocera
Med J Aust 2003; 178 (3): .
Published online: 3 February 2003

To the Editor: Tan and Fitzgerald's template for emergency department response to chemical–biological–radiological hazards appears to be based on a dubious assumption of a low level of risk.1 A recent report details exposure of emergency department staff to potentially fatal secondary contamination during a hazardous materials incident, highlighting the need for staff to have the appropriate training and equipment to deal with these events.2


  • 1. Tan GA, Fitzgerald MCB. Chemical–biological–radiological (CBR) response: a template for hospital emergency departments. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 196-199. <MJA full text>
  • 2. Geller RJ, Singleton KL, Tarantino ML, et al. Nosocomial poisoning associated with emergency department treatment of organophosphate toxicity — Georgia, 2000. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 2001; 39: 109-111.
  • 3. Standard AS/NZS 1715: 1994. Selection, use and maintenance of respiratory protective devices. Sydney: Standards Australia, 1994.
  • 4. Australian Emergency Manual Series Part 3. Emergency management practice. Volume 2. Specific issues. Manual 3. Health aspects of chemical, biological and radiological hazards. Canberra: Emergency Management Australia, 2000.
  • 5. Nozaki H, Hori S, Shinozawa Y, et al Secondary exposure of medical staff to sarin vapour in the emergency room. Intens Care Med 1995; 21: 1032-1035.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.