Many Health Workers Would Not Respond To Flu Pandemic, USA

According to a survey in which 308 health care workers were questioned, 42% of them would not report to work if a flu pandemic hit the USA. Details of the survey can be found in the journal BMC Public Health. They say they would not show up because of fear of getting sick themselves.


The researchers found that the likelihood of a health worker saying he/she would not turn up was linked to how vital they felt their role was. People who considered themselves to be less vital, according to the poll, were less likely to say they would show up. Technical and support staff were the least keen to say they would definitely report to work. On the other hand, only 40% of those surveyed thought they were likely to be called up.


Over 60% of the people polled said they did not know what impact a flu pandemic might have of on society and health services.


The poll was carried out over a four month period (March-July 2005) and involved health care workers from Carroll, Dorchester, and Harford county health departments, Maryland (USA).


The survey included questions on:


-- Age

-- Gender


-- 5-point Likert scale asking:


-- Likelihood of reporting to work during a flu pandemic ('very likely' or 'not at all likely')

-- Likelihood of being asked to respond to an emergency ('very likely' to 'not at all likely')

-- Their knowledge about the potential public impact of a pandemic influenza ('very knowledgeable' to 'not at all knowledgeable')

-- how confident they were about being safe in their work roles ("very confident" to "not at all confident")

-- how likely was their family prepared to function in their absence ("very likely" to "not at all likely")

-- how likely they felt their health department would provide them with timely updates ("very likely" to "not at all likely")

-- how familiar they were with their role specific response requirements ("very familiar" to "not at all familiar")

-- how well they thought they could address the questions of a concerned member of the public ("very well" to "not at all")

-- how significant a role they thought they would play in the agency's overall response ("very significant" to "not at all significant")

-- how important would be pre-event preparation and training ("very important" to "not at all important")

-- how important it was for them to have psychological support available during the event ("very important" to "not at all important")

-- how important it was for them to have psychological support available after the event ("very important" to "not at all important").


They were asked to classify their jobs as follows:


-- technical/support staff (such as computer entry staff, clerical staff (e.g. receptionists)

-- computer specialists, health information systems data analysts etc.

-- professional staff (including public health officials, doctor, nurse, dentist, public health communicable disease staff, environmental health staff, public information staff, and other public health professional staff)


The researchers said more training of health care workers is needed. Training should focus not only on what to do in the event of a pandemic, but also why people should report to work (encourage willingness). Health care workers also need to be sure that authorities will do everything they can to protect their health.


Whether or not people would react according to the survey when faced with a true crisis, is another matter.


Authorities should be concerned that support staff, such as receptionists and employees who first meet people when they enter a clinic or a hospital, would be vital employees in a flu pandemic. For the moment, many support staff do not think their role would be vital. Their perceptions of who may be considered as 'key personnel' need to change.


Click here to see the study in full (PDF)


Written by: