TY - JOUR
T1 - Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to Local Health Department Workers' Participation in Infectious Disease Emergency Responses
AU - Rutkow, Lainie
AU - Paul, Amy
AU - Taylor, Holly A.
AU - Barnett, Daniel J.
N1 - Funding Information:
Author Affiliations: Departments of Health Policy and Management (Drs Rutkow and Taylor) and Environmental Health and Engineering (Dr Barnett), Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland; and Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland (Drs Paul and Taylor). This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences (#R01GM105956). The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Correspondence: Lainie Rutkow, JD, PhD, MPH, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Room 592, Baltimore, MD 21205 (lrutkow@jhu.edu). Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Context: Local health departments play a key role in emergency preparedness and respond to a wide range of threats including infectious diseases such as seasonal influenza, tuberculosis, H1N1, Ebola virus disease, and Zika virus disease. To successfully respond to an infectious disease outbreak, local health departments depend upon the participation of their workforce; yet, studies indicate that sizable numbers of workers would not participate in such a response. The reasons why local health department workers participate, or fail to participate, in infectious disease responses are not well understood. Objective: To understand why local health department workers are willing, or not willing, to report to work during an infectious disease response. Design: From April 2015 to January 2016, we conducted 28 semistructured interviews with local health department directors, preparedness staff, and nonpreparedness staff. Setting: Interviews were conducted with individuals throughout the United States. Participants: We interviewed 28 individuals across 3 groups: local health department directors (n = 8), preparedness staff (n = 10), and nonpreparedness staff (n = 10). Main Outcome Measures: Individuals' descriptions of why local health department workers are willing, or not willing, to report to work during an infectious disease response. Results: Factors that facilitate willingness to respond to an infectious disease emergency included availability of vaccines and personal protective equipment; flexible work schedule and childcare arrangements; information sharing via local health department trainings; and perceived commitments to one's job and community. Factors that hinder willingness to respond to an infectious disease emergency included potential disease exposure for oneself and one's family; logistical considerations for care of children, the elderly, and pets; and perceptions about one's role during an infectious disease response. Conclusion: Our findings highlight opportunities for local health departments to revisit their internal policies and engage in strategies likely to promote willingness to respond among their staff. As LHDs face the persistent threat of infectious diseases, they must account for response willingness when planning for and fielding emergency responses. Our findings highlight opportunities for local health departments to revisit their internal policies and engage in strategies likely to promote response willingness to infectious disease emergencies among their staff.
AB - Context: Local health departments play a key role in emergency preparedness and respond to a wide range of threats including infectious diseases such as seasonal influenza, tuberculosis, H1N1, Ebola virus disease, and Zika virus disease. To successfully respond to an infectious disease outbreak, local health departments depend upon the participation of their workforce; yet, studies indicate that sizable numbers of workers would not participate in such a response. The reasons why local health department workers participate, or fail to participate, in infectious disease responses are not well understood. Objective: To understand why local health department workers are willing, or not willing, to report to work during an infectious disease response. Design: From April 2015 to January 2016, we conducted 28 semistructured interviews with local health department directors, preparedness staff, and nonpreparedness staff. Setting: Interviews were conducted with individuals throughout the United States. Participants: We interviewed 28 individuals across 3 groups: local health department directors (n = 8), preparedness staff (n = 10), and nonpreparedness staff (n = 10). Main Outcome Measures: Individuals' descriptions of why local health department workers are willing, or not willing, to report to work during an infectious disease response. Results: Factors that facilitate willingness to respond to an infectious disease emergency included availability of vaccines and personal protective equipment; flexible work schedule and childcare arrangements; information sharing via local health department trainings; and perceived commitments to one's job and community. Factors that hinder willingness to respond to an infectious disease emergency included potential disease exposure for oneself and one's family; logistical considerations for care of children, the elderly, and pets; and perceptions about one's role during an infectious disease response. Conclusion: Our findings highlight opportunities for local health departments to revisit their internal policies and engage in strategies likely to promote willingness to respond among their staff. As LHDs face the persistent threat of infectious diseases, they must account for response willingness when planning for and fielding emergency responses. Our findings highlight opportunities for local health departments to revisit their internal policies and engage in strategies likely to promote response willingness to infectious disease emergencies among their staff.
KW - communicable diseases
KW - disasters
KW - policy
KW - public health practice
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030120977&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85030120977&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000574
DO - 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000574
M3 - Article
C2 - 28832434
AN - SCOPUS:85030120977
VL - 23
SP - 644
EP - 650
JO - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
JF - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
SN - 1078-4659
IS - 6
ER -