Wuqi Qiu1, Cordia Chu2, Xiaohui Hou3, Shannon Rutherford2, Bin Zhu4, Zhendong Tong5, Ayan Mao1. 1. 1Department of Public Health Information Research,Institute of Medical Information,Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences,China. 2. 2Center for Environment and Population Health,Griffith University,Australia. 3. 3Department of Science, Education and International Cooperation,Chinese Center for Health Education,China. 4. 4Health Emergency Center,Hangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention,China(Bin Zhu). 5. 5Department of Emergency Management,Zhoushan Center for Disease Control and Prevention,China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: China's emergency management of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) was heavily criticized, whereas the H7N9 response was praised by the international community.AimsThe aims of this study were to examine and compare the strengths and weaknesses of risk communication conducted in response to SARS and H7N9 and their associated social impacts on affected communities in China. METHOD: A qualitative comparative case study approach was employed in the present study, using a set of 8 risk communication principles selected from international literature to suit the Chinese context for the comparative analysis of emergency responses of SARS and H7N9. RESULTS: The study found significant differences in the risk communication conducted in the 2 cases. The SARS outbreak fully exposed China's lack of experience in public health risk communication. By contrast, the Chinese government's risk communication strategies had improved significantly during the H7N9 outbreak.DiscussionTrust is the basis for communication. Maintaining an open and honest attitude and actively engaging stakeholders to address their risk information needs will serve to build trust and facilitate multi-sector collaborations in dealing with a public health crisis. CONCLUSIONS: From SARS to H7N9, risk communication practices in China greatly improved, which, in turn, lessened adverse social impacts and improved outcomes in emergency management of public health crises. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:587-598).
BACKGROUND: China's emergency management of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) was heavily criticized, whereas the H7N9 response was praised by the international community.AimsThe aims of this study were to examine and compare the strengths and weaknesses of risk communication conducted in response to SARS and H7N9 and their associated social impacts on affected communities in China. METHOD: A qualitative comparative case study approach was employed in the present study, using a set of 8 risk communication principles selected from international literature to suit the Chinese context for the comparative analysis of emergency responses of SARS and H7N9. RESULTS: The study found significant differences in the risk communication conducted in the 2 cases. The SARS outbreak fully exposed China's lack of experience in public health risk communication. By contrast, the Chinese government's risk communication strategies had improved significantly during the H7N9 outbreak.DiscussionTrust is the basis for communication. Maintaining an open and honest attitude and actively engaging stakeholders to address their risk information needs will serve to build trust and facilitate multi-sector collaborations in dealing with a public health crisis. CONCLUSIONS: From SARS to H7N9, risk communication practices in China greatly improved, which, in turn, lessened adverse social impacts and improved outcomes in emergency management of public health crises. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:587-598).
Entities:
Keywords:
China; H7N9; SARS; emergency management; risk communication