Objective: Identify determinants of emergency medical service (EMS) personnel's willingness to work during an influenza pandemic. Background: Little is known about the willingness of EMS personnel to work during a future influenza pandemic or the extent to which they are receiving pandemic training. Methods: EMS personnel were surveyed in July 2018 - Feb 2019 using a cross-sectional approach; the survey was available both electronically and on paper. Participants were provided a pandemic scenario and asked about their willingness to respond if requested or required; additional questions assessed their attitudes and beliefs and training received. Chi-square tests assessed differences in attitude/belief questions by willingness to work. Logistic regressions were used to identify significant predictors of response willingness when requested or required, controlling for gender and race. Results: 433 individuals completed the survey (response rate = 82.9%). A quarter (26.8%, n = 116) received no pandemic training; 14.3% (n = 62) participated in a pandemic exercise. Significantly more EMS personnel were willing to work when required versus when only requested (88.2% vs 76.9%, X2 = 164.1, p < .001). Predictors of willingness to work when requested included believing it is their responsibility to work, believing their coworkers were likely to work, receiving prophylaxis for themselves and their family members, and feeling safe working during a pandemic. Discussion: Many emergency medical services personnel report lacking training or disaster exercises related to influenza pandemics, and a fair percentage are unwilling to work during a future event. This may limit healthcare surge capacity and could contribute to increased morbidity and mortality. Findings from this study indicate that prehospital staff's attitudes and beliefs about pandemics influence their willingness to work. Pre-event training and planning should address these concerns.
Objective: Identify determinants of emergency medical service (EMS) personnel's willingness to work during an influenza pandemic. Background: Little is known about the willingness of EMS personnel to work during a future influenza pandemic or the extent to which they are receiving pandemic training. Methods: EMS personnel were surveyed in July 2018 - Feb 2019 using a cross-sectional approach; the survey was available both electronically and on paper. Participants were provided a pandemic scenario and asked about their willingness to respond if requested or required; additional questions assessed their attitudes and beliefs and training received. Chi-square tests assessed differences in attitude/belief questions by willingness to work. Logistic regressions were used to identify significant predictors of response willingness when requested or required, controlling for gender and race. Results: 433 individuals completed the survey (response rate = 82.9%). A quarter (26.8%, n = 116) received no pandemic training; 14.3% (n = 62) participated in a pandemic exercise. Significantly more EMS personnel were willing to work when required versus when only requested (88.2% vs 76.9%, X2 = 164.1, p < .001). Predictors of willingness to work when requested included believing it is their responsibility to work, believing their coworkers were likely to work, receiving prophylaxis for themselves and their family members, and feeling safe working during a pandemic. Discussion: Many emergency medical services personnel report lacking training or disaster exercises related to influenza pandemics, and a fair percentage are unwilling to work during a future event. This may limit healthcare surge capacity and could contribute to increased morbidity and mortality. Findings from this study indicate that prehospital staff's attitudes and beliefs about pandemics influence their willingness to work. Pre-event training and planning should address these concerns.
Entities:
Keywords:
disaster; emergency management; medical countermeasures; pandemic; prehospital; surge capacity
Authors: Christopher M Watson; Daniel J Barnett; Carol B Thompson; Edbert B Hsu; Christina L Catlett; Howard S Gwon; Natalie L Semon; Ran D Balicer; Jonathan M Links Journal: Am J Disaster Med Date: 2011 Sep-Oct
Authors: Robyn R M Gershon; Nikole Vandelinde; Lori A Magda; Julie M Pearson; Andrew Werner; David Prezant Journal: Prehosp Disaster Med Date: 2009 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.040
Authors: Daniel J Barnett; Roger Levine; Carol B Thompson; Gamunu U Wijetunge; Anthony L Oliver; Melissa A Bentley; Patrick D Neubert; Ronald G Pirrallo; Jonathan M Links; Ran D Balicer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-03-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Krzysztof Goniewicz; Mariusz Goniewicz; Anna Włoszczak-Szubzda; Frederick M Burkle; Attila J Hertelendy; Ahmed Al-Wathinani; Michael Sean Molloy; Amir Khorram-Manesh Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-01-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Raúl Soto-Cámara; Noemí García-Santa-Basilia; Henar Onrubia-Baticón; Rosa M Cárdaba-García; José Julio Jiménez-Alegre; Ana María Reques-Marugán; María Molina-Oliva; Juan José Fernández-Domínguez; María Paz Matellán-Hernández; Almudena Morales-Sanchez; Susana Navalpotro-Pascual Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-11-27 Impact factor: 4.241