Search

Introduction: Communication in public health emergencies is an important means to ensure population's confidence in the decisions of the central authority. Usually, the lack of planning communication strategy entails negative reactions from the population and decreased compliance to the recommended preventive measures in response to the emergency. Objectives: The study presents the techniques and means of communication used in several countries of the world during pandemic influenza A H1N1pdm in 2009 and the data on the impact of different communication strategies on the behaviour of population towards the recommended public health measures and towards vaccination. Method: The data were collected and summarized by evaluating scientific articles, official public reports of the countries and the information posted on the websites of public health authorities. Results: The most frequently used communication techniques were teleconferences, posters, informative flyers and dedicated hotlines addressed to both population and medical staff involved in the implementation of public health measures. Creating crisis committees or special units dedicated to the accumulation of information and communication was one of the solutions found by some countries to ensure a coordinated communication type. In the United Kingdom, of 1000 participants in a study to assess the impact on communication, only 39% said they had received informative flyers and only 26% of them read them. Basically, there was no difference in behaviour between those who received the flyer information and those who did not received it (OR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.7-1.2). In a study conducted in France, it was shown that only 17% of the 2,253 people surveyed wanted to be vaccinated with the pandemic vaccine. In Romania, the survey conducted in 2010 within the FLUMODCONT project, indicated that only 58% of respondents were offered the pandemic vaccine and of these, only 34% said that did the vaccine. Conclusions: Although in many countries of the world, national preparedness plans included references to the ways and techniques of communication and target groups, whom the messages should be addressed to in a pandemic, in 2009, they have not always proved effective. Since the level of severity of the pandemic was lower than expected, there were shortcomings in communication both towards the public and to the health care providers. Unclear and not always coordinated communication led in many states to low levels of influenza vaccination coverage, and also to a lower confidence in the use of vaccination as a safe and effective preventive measure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Communication in public health emergencies is an important tool to ensure population's confidence in the decisions of the central authority. Usually, the lack of planning communication strategy entails negative reactions from the population and decreased compliance to the recommended preventive measures in response to the emergency. Objectives: The study presents the techniques and means of communication used in several countries of the world during pandemic influenza A H1N1pdm in 2009 and the data on the impact of different communication strategies on the behaviour of population towards the recommended public health measures and towards vaccination. Method: The data were collected and summarized by evaluating scientific articles, official public reports of the countries and the information posted on the websites of public health authorities. Results: The most frequently used communication techniques were teleconferences, posters, informative flyers and dedicated hotlines addressed to both population and medical staff involved in the implementation of public health measures. Creating crisis committees or special units dedicated to the accumulation of information and communication was one of the solutions found by some countries to ensure a coordinated communication type. In the United Kingdom, of 1000 participants in a study to assess the impact on communication, only 39% said they had received informative flyers and only 26% of them read them. Basically, there was no difference in behaviour between those who received the flyer information and those who did not receive it (OR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.7-1.2). In a study conducted in France, it was shown that only 17% of the 2,253 people surveyed wanted to be vaccinated with the pandemic vaccine. In Romania, the survey conducted in 2010 within the FLUMODCONT project, indicated that only 58% of respondents were offered the pandemic vaccine and of these, only 34% said that did the vaccine. Conclusions: Although in many countries of the world, national preparedness plans included references to the ways and techniques of communication and target groups, whom the messages should be addressed to in a pandemic, in 2009, they have not always proved effective. Since the level of severity of the pandemic was lower than expected, there were shortcomings in communication both towards the public and to the health care providers. Unclear and not always coordinated communication led in many states to low levels of influenza vaccination coverage, and also to a lower confidence in the use of vaccination as a safe and effective preventive measure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]