Physical injuries and fatalities resulting from the Oklahoma City bombing
S. Mallonee, S. Shariat, G. Stennies, R. Waxweiler, D. Hogan and F. Jordan
Oklahoma State Department of Health, Injury Prevention Service, Oklahoma City, 73117-1299, USA.
OBJECTIVE: To provide an epidemiologic description of physical injuries and
fatalities resulting from the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Alfred P.
Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive
epidemiologic study of all persons injured by the bombing and of all
at-risk occupants of the federal building and 4 adjacent buildings. Data
were gathered from hospital emergency and medical records departments,
medical examiner records, and surveys of area physicians, building
occupants, and survivors. STUDY POPULATION: All persons known to have been
exposed to the blast. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics of fatalities
and injuries, injury maps, and injury rates by building location. RESULTS:
A total of 759 persons sustained injuries, 167 persons died, 83 survivors
were hospitalized, and 509 persons were treated as outpatients. Of the 361
persons who were in the federal building, 319 (88%) were injured, of whom
163 (45%) died, including 19 children. Persons in the collapsed part of the
federal building were significantly more likely to die (153/175, 87%) than
those in other parts of the building (10/186, 5%) (risk ratio [RR], 16.3;
95% confidence interval [CI], 8.9-29.8). In 4 adjacent buildings, injury
rates varied from 38% to 100%; 3 persons in these buildings and 1 person in
an outdoor location died. The most frequent cause of death was multiple
injuries. Among survivors, soft tissue injuries, fractures, sprains,
strains, and head injuries were most common; these injuries were most often
caused by flying glass and other debris and collapsed ceilings.
CONCLUSIONS: The Oklahoma City bombing resulted in the largest number of
fatalities of any terrorist act in the United States, and there were 4
times as many nonfatal injuries as fatalities. Disaster management plans
should include the possibility of terrorist bombing, and medical
preparedness should anticipate that most injuries will be nonfatal. The
role of building collapse in fatal injuries should be considered in the
design of buildings at high risk of being bombed so as to reduce injuries.
Intensive Care Unit Disaster Preparation: Keep it Simple
Geiling
J Intensive Care Med 2008;23:285-288.
Postexposure Immunization and Prophylaxis of Bloodborne Pathogens Following a Traumatic Explosive Event: Preliminary Recommendations
Subbarao et al.
dmphp 2007;1:106-109.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Preventing Fatalities in Building Bombings: What Can We Learn From the Oklahoma City Bombing?
Glenshaw et al.
dmphp 2007;1:27-31.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY: Preventing Fatalities in Building Bombings: What Can We Learn From the Oklahoma City Bombing?
Peleg
dmphp 2007;1:31-33.
FULL TEXT
Anesthesiologists Should Be Familiar with the Management of Victims of Terrorist Attacks
Sigurdsson
Anesth. Analg. 2004;98:1743-1745.
FULL TEXT
Multiple Casualty Terror Events: The Anesthesiologist's Perspective
Shamir et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2004;98:1746-1752.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Injury Surveillance
Horan and Mallonee
Epidemiol Rev 2003;25:24-42.
FULL TEXT
Miracles take a little longer: the challenges of the uncompensated major incident
Woollard
Trauma 2003;5:71-76.
ABSTRACT
Blast and Fragment Injuries of the Musculoskeletal System
Covey
JBJS 2002;84:1221-1234.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Weapons of Mass Destruction Events With Contaminated Casualties: Effective Planning for Health Care Facilities
Macintyre et al.
JAMA 2000;283:242-249.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Psychiatric Disorders Among Survivors of the Oklahoma City Bombing
North et al.
JAMA 1999;282:755-762.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Delphi study into planning for care of children in major incidents
Carley et al.
Arch. Dis. Child. 1999;80:406-409.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Post-Disaster Stress Following the Oklahoma City Bombing: An Examination of Three Community Groups
SPRANG
J Interpers Violence 1999;14:169-183.
ABSTRACT