| Literature DB >> 34067740 |
Kevin K C Hung1,2, Makiko K MacDermot2, Emily Y Y Chan1,2,3, Sida Liu3, Zhe Huang1, Chi S Wong1, Joseph H Walline2, Colin A Graham1,2.
Abstract
Disasters disproportionately impact poor and marginalised populations due to greater vulnerability induced by various risk determinants, such as compromised living conditions, language barriers, and limited resources for disaster risk management. Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management (Health EDRM) emphasises a people- and community-centred approach for building stronger capacities in communities and countries since community members are often the first responders to health emergencies and should be central to effective risk management. A key action for promoting community disaster preparedness is the provision of Health EDRM education interventions. The Ethnic Minority Health Project (EHMP) has provided community-based Health EDRM education interventions in 16 ethnic minority-based villages in remote areas of China since 2009. It aims to enhance community disaster preparedness and resilience by improving health-risk literacy and self-help capacity at the individual and household levels. This case study outlines the first EHMP project in an ethnic minority-based community (Ma'an Qiao Village) in Sichuan Province, China. It highlights the key elements for planning and managing such a project and is a good demonstration of an effective Health EDRM workforce development project in rural communities. This report concludes with five recommendations for setting up a sustainable and effective Health EDRM education intervention in similar contexts.Entities:
Keywords: China; Health EDRM workforce development; community disaster resilience; community-based intervention; disaster education; disasters; ethnic minority; health emergency and disaster risk management (Health EDRM)
Year: 2021 PMID: 34067740 PMCID: PMC8155925 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18105322
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Project Timeline and Outline for the Ma’an Qiao Village Programme.
Key Stakeholders and their Responsibilities.
| Stakeholders | Sectors | Responsibilities |
|---|---|---|
| CCOUC | Public Health/ |
Health needs assessment Planning, implementing and evaluating the programme Recruiting university student volunteers Planning and managing village trips |
| The Wu Zhi Qiao Charitable Foundation | Architecture/ |
Needs assessment for sustainable development, e.g., footbridges and facilities Facilitating access to communities Sharing local knowledge based on previous work in the village |
| Local Government | Government |
Sharing information/data about the village Facilitating community access |
| Village Leaders | Local Stakeholders |
Promoting and supporting activities throughout interventions Facilitating rapport between villagers and programme implementors |
| University Student Volunteers | Tertiary Education |
Manpower Facilitating promotion activities Conducting pre- and post-intervention evaluation surveys |
Characteristics of Participants in the 2010, 2011 and 2018 Surveys in the Ma’an Qiao Village Programme.
| 2010 a ( | 2011 b ( | 2018 c ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male to female ratio | 1:1.6 | 1:1.3 | 1:1.4 |
| Age Category (years) | |||
| <45 | Mean = 44.5 | 49.7% | 42.3% |
| 45–59 | 26.3% | 31.0% | |
| ≥60 | 24.0% | 26.8% | |
| Educational Attainment | |||
| Non-Literate | 31% | 41.0% | 24.0% |
| Primary School | 53% | 43.3% | 46.5% |
| Junior High School | NA | 12.3% | 21.1% |
| Senior High School | NA | 2.9% | 5.6% |
| Tertiary School | NA | 0.6% | 2.8% |
| Mean Household Size | NA | 3.9 | 4.2 |
| Income per person (RMB) | NA | 4029 | 18,026 |
| Agricultural Sector Occupation | 83% | 88.8% | 94.4% |
| Self-Reported Health Status | |||
| Good | NA | 39.5% | 61.8% |
| Average | NA | NA | 16.2% |
| Poor | NA | NA | 22.1% |
Data Sources: a Data collected during the 2010 visit; b Data collected during the 2011 visit; c Data collected during the 2018 visit.
Changes in beliefs and knowledge in the 2010/2011 pre- and post-intervention and the 2018 evaluation survey.
| Types | Outcome Measures | 2010 & 2011 Interventions | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Evaluation | ||
| Believing in the need of handwashing before meal | 88% | 99% | 97% | |
| Believing in the need of handwashing after toilet | 90% | 93% | 93% | |
| Knowing the health risks (e.g., diarrhoea) of poor hand hygiene | 85% | 99% | 87% | |
| Believing that smoking can cause lung cancer | 64% | 94% | 94% | |
| Believing that passive smoking is more harmful for children | 80% | 97% | 91% | |
| Knowing the health risks of misplaced excreta | 84% | 99% | - | |
| Knowing health risks of misplaced kitchen waste | 81% | 96% | - | |
| Believing that it is safe to burn different types of wastes together | 67% | 47% | 47% | |
| Knowledge of hypertension | 57% | 85% | - | |
| Knowing the health risks (hypertension) of high salt intake | 71% | 95% | 81% | |
| Knowing health risks (diabetics) of higher meat intake | 41% | 79% | - | |
| Believing the importance of disaster preparedness | 88% | 95% | 93% | |
| Knowing how to prepare a ‘disaster kit’ | 45% | 65% | - | |
| Intention to prepare a ‘disaster kit’ | 58% | 93% | 68% | |
| Being confident in dealing with future disasters | 89% | 95% | 85% | |
| Knowing how to evacuate from floods | 94% | 98% | 98% | |
tests were conducted between the percentage of 2010–2011 pre- and post-intervention results and between 2010/2011 post-intervention and 2018 evaluation results. ↑ = increase, ↓ = decrease.