Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to Local Health Department Workers' Participation in Infectious Disease Emergency Responses

Willingness to Work during Public Health Emergencies: A Systematic Literature Review

The identification of the factors underlying the willingness or lack thereof to respond to public health emergencies is paramount to informing more capable health services. The interest in this topic appears renewed with each surge of threat, either referring to natural disasters, man-made violence, or epidemic and pandemics. However, there is no systematic approach to the research patterns and related main findings concerning individual and contextual determinants. The present article contributes to this theme through a systematic literature review of a sample of 150 articles published in the last 30 years on the subject of willingness and preparedness of health professionals to deal with public health threats. Our findings show that the research is mainly phenomena and contextual driven, responding to whichever emergency threat is more salient in a given period. Geographically, research on this topic is led by USA and China, mostly solely, while European countries invest in collaborations that are more international. Universities, including health institutes and schools, and researchers at hospitals conduct most of the research on the topic. The main research areas are medicine, psychology, and psychiatry. Pandemics, including COVID-19, influenza, and natural disasters, are the phenomena gauging more attention as opposed to terrorism events and biological accidents. The specific role of health professionals within the institution, their belief in ethical duties, preparation training, and concerns regarding infection of self and family are the main variables influencing the willingness and ability to report to work in public health emergencies.

Facilitation activities for change response: a qualitative study on infection prevention and control professionals during a pandemic in Brazil

Purpose

Facilitation activities support implementation of evidence-based interventions within healthcare organizations. Few studies have attempted to understand how facilitation activities are performed to promote the uptake of evidence-based interventions in hospitals from resource-poor countries during crises such as pandemics. This paper aims to explore facilitation activities by infection prevention and control (IPC) professionals in 16 hospitals from 9 states in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design/methodology/approach

Primary and secondary data were collected between March and December 2020. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 IPC professionals in Brazilian hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Public and internal documents were used for data triangulation. The data were analyzed through thematic analysis technique.

Findings

Building on the change response theory, this study explores the facilitation activities from the cognitive, behavioral and affective aspects. The facilitation activities are grouped in three overarching dimensions: (1) creating and sustaining legitimacy to continuous and rapid changes, (2) fostering capabilities for continuous changes and (3) accelerating individual commitment.

Practical implications

During crises such as pandemics, facilitation activities by IPC professionals need to embrace all the cognitive, behavioral and affective aspects to stimulate positive attitudes of frontline workers toward continuous and urgent changes.

Originality/value

This study provides unique and timely empirical evidence on the facilitation activities that support the implementation of evidence-based interventions by IPC professionals during crises in hospitals in a resource-poor country.

Factors Influencing Health Care Workers' Willingness to Respond to Duty during Infectious Disease Outbreaks and Bioterrorist Events: An Integrative Review

BACKGROUND

Infectious disease emergencies are increasingly becoming part of the health care delivery landscape, having implications to not only individuals and the public, but also on those expected to respond to these emergencies. Health care workers (HCWs) are perhaps the most important asset in an infectious disease emergency, yet these individuals have their own barriers and facilitators to them being willing or able to respond.

AIM

The purpose of this review was to identify factors affecting HCW willingness to respond (WTR) to duty during infectious disease outbreaks and/or bioterrorist events.

METHODS

An integrative literature review methodology was utilized to conduct a structured search of the literature including CINAHL, Medline, Embase, and PubMed databases using key terms and phrases. PRISMA guidelines were used to report the search outcomes and all eligible literature was screened with those included in the final review collated and appraised using a quality assessment tool.

RESULTS

A total of 149 papers were identified from the database search. Forty papers were relevant following screening, which highlighted facilitators of WTR to include: availability of personal protective equipment (PPE)/vaccine, level of training, professional ethics, family and personal safety, and worker support systems. A number of barriers were reported to prevent WTR for HCWs, such as: concern and perceived risk, interpersonal factors, job-level factors, and outbreak characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

By comprehensively identifying the facilitators and barriers to HCWs' WTR during infectious disease outbreaks and/or bioterrorist events, strategies can be identified and implemented to improve WTR and thus improve HCW and public safety.

The Current State of Infectious Disasters Preparedness Around the World: A Qualitative Systematic Review (2007-2019)

Infectious disasters have specific features which require special approaches and facilities. The main challenge is the rate of spread, and their ability to traverse the Earth in a short time. The preparedness of hospitals to face these events is therefore of the utmost importance. This study was designed to assess the preparedness of countries facing biological events worldwide. A qualitative systematic review was done from PubMed (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD), Scopus (Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands), Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY), ProQuest (Ann Arbor, MI), and Google Scholar (Google Inc, Mountain View, CA). Two journals were searched as key journals. The search period was from January 1, 2007 to December 30, 2018. Twenty-one (21) documents were selected including 7 (33%) from Asia, 7 (33%) from Europe, 4 (19%) from USA, 2 (10%) from Africa, and 1 (5%) multi-continental. Forty-six (46) common sub-themes were obtained and categorized into 13 themes (infection prevention control, risk perception, planning, essential support services, surveillance, laboratory, vulnerable groups, education and exercise and evaluation, human resource, clinical management of patients, risk communication, budget, and coordination). Not all articles discussed all the identified categories. There is an extended process required to reach complete preparedness for confronting biological events, including adequate and well-managed budget. Medical centers may have trouble dealing with such events, at least in some respects, but most developed countries seem to be more prepared in this regard.

Factors affecting hospital response in biological disasters: A qualitative study

Background: The fatal pandemics of infectious diseases and the possibility of using microorganisms as biological weapons are both rising worldwide. Hospitals are vital organizations in response to biological disasters and have a crucial role in the treatment of patients. Despite the advances in studies about hospital planning and performance during crises, there are no internationally accepted standards for hospital preparedness and disaster response. Thus, this study was designed to explain the effective factors in hospital performance during biological disasters. Methods: Qualitative content analysis with conventional approach was used in the present study. The setting was Ministry of Health and related hospitals, and other relevant ministries responsible at the time of biologic events in Islamic Republic of Iran (IR of Iran) in 2018. Participants were experts, experienced individuals providing service in the field of biological disaster planning and response, policymakers in the Ministry of Health, and other related organizations and authorities responsible for the accreditation of hospitals in IR of Iran. Data were collected using 12 semi-structured interviews in Persian language. Analysis was performed according to Graneheim method. Results: After analyzing 12 interviews, extraction resulted in 76 common codes, 28 subcategories, and 8 categories, which are as follow: detection; treatment and infection control; coordination, Resources; training and exercises; communication and information system; construction; and planning and assessment. Conclusion: Hospital management in outbreaks of infectious diseases (intentional or unintentional) is complex and requires different actions than during natural disasters. In such disasters, readiness to respond and appropriate action is a multifaceted operation. In IR of Iran, there have been few researches in the field of hospital preparation in biologic events, and the possibility of standardized assessment has be reduced due to lack of key skills in confronting biological events. It is hoped that the aggregated factors in the 8 groups of this study can evaluate hospital performance more coherently.

Perceived Benefits and Challenges of Ebola Preparation Among Hospitals in Developed Countries: A Systematic Literature Review

The 2014–2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa provided an opportunity to improve our response to highly infectious diseases. We performed a systematic literature review in PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Web of Science of research articles that evaluated benefits and challenges of hospital Ebola preparation in developed countries. We excluded studies performed in non-developed countries, and those limited to primary care settings, the public health sector, and pediatric populations. Thirty-five articles were included. Preparedness activities were beneficial for identifying gaps in hospital readiness. Training improved health-care workers’ (HCW) infection control practices and personal protective equipment (PPE) use. The biggest challenge was related to PPE, followed by problems with hospital infrastructure and resources. HCWs feared managing Ebola patients, affecting their willingness to care for them. Standardizing protocols, PPE types, and frequency of training and providing financial support will improve future preparedness. It is unclear whether preparations resulted in sustained improvements.

Prospero Registration. CRD42018090988.

Priorities, Barriers, and Facilitators towards International Guidelines for the Delivery of Supportive Clinical Care during an Ebola Outbreak: A Cross-Sectional Survey

During the Ebola outbreak, mortality reduction was attributed to multiple improvements in supportive care delivered in Ebola treatment units (ETUs). We aimed to identify high-priority supportive care measures, as well as perceived barriers and facilitators to their implementation, for patients with Ebola Virus Disease (EVD). We conducted a cross-sectional survey of key stakeholders involved in the response to the 2014⁻2016 West African EVD outbreak. Out of 57 email invitations, 44 responses were received, and 29 respondents completed the survey. The respondents listed insufficient numbers of health workers (23/29, 79%), improper tools for the documentation of clinical data (n = 22/28, 79%), insufficient material resources (n = 22/29, 76%), and unadapted personal protective equipment (n = 20/28, 71%) as the main barriers to the provision of supportive care in ETUs. Facilitators to the provision of supportive care included team camaraderie (n in agreement = 25/28, 89%), ability to speak the local language (22/28, 79%), and having treatment protocols in place (22/28, 79%). This survey highlights a consensus across various stakeholders involved in the response to the 2014⁻2016 EVD outbreak on a limited number of high-priority supportive care interventions for clinical practice guidelines. Identified barriers and facilitators further inform the application of guidelines.