BACKGROUND: The public's ability and willingness to adopt community mitigation efforts during a pandemic are debated in the literature. PURPOSE: Awareness and adoption of community mitigation efforts in Mexico during the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1) outbreak were measured to evaluate if the population received, understood, and acted on public health messages. METHODS: A cross-sectional representative household survey in Mexico City; San Luis Potosi (high case ratio); and Queretaro (low case ratio) was conducted in May and June 2009. Accounting for the complex survey design, percentages and 95% CI for answers to all questions were generated and compared based on living inside or outside Mexico City, high versus low prevalence of infection in the community, and perceived severity and knowledge of the virus. RESULTS: Greater than 90% of respondents received community mitigation messages and adopted one or more community mitigation efforts. There were few differences among cities. Respondents reported high cost of masks, soaps, and gels as barriers to community mitigation-effort adoption. Nearly one fifth of respondents, disproportionally from the lower socioeconomic tertile, found some messages confusing. Half of all households reported a negative economic impact resulting from the outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: Mexico's community mitigation campaign reached the majority of the population in three surveyed cities. Confusion regarding messages and economic barriers to community mitigation-effort adoption were sometimes reported. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: The public's ability and willingness to adopt community mitigation efforts during a pandemic are debated in the literature. PURPOSE: Awareness and adoption of community mitigation efforts in Mexico during the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1) outbreak were measured to evaluate if the population received, understood, and acted on public health messages. METHODS: A cross-sectional representative household survey in Mexico City; San Luis Potosi (high case ratio); and Queretaro (low case ratio) was conducted in May and June 2009. Accounting for the complex survey design, percentages and 95% CI for answers to all questions were generated and compared based on living inside or outside Mexico City, high versus low prevalence of infection in the community, and perceived severity and knowledge of the virus. RESULTS: Greater than 90% of respondents received community mitigation messages and adopted one or more community mitigation efforts. There were few differences among cities. Respondents reported high cost of masks, soaps, and gels as barriers to community mitigation-effort adoption. Nearly one fifth of respondents, disproportionally from the lower socioeconomic tertile, found some messages confusing. Half of all households reported a negative economic impact resulting from the outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: Mexico's community mitigation campaign reached the majority of the population in three surveyed cities. Confusion regarding messages and economic barriers to community mitigation-effort adoption were sometimes reported. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Elena Savoia; Michael A Stoto; Rahul Gupta; Nasandra Wright; Kasisomayajula Viswanath Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 3.295