18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Healthcare workers' attitudes to working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Healthcare workers (HCWs) will play a key role in any response to pandemic influenza, and the UK healthcare system's ability to cope during an influenza pandemic will depend, to a large extent, on the number of HCWs who are able and willing to work through the crisis. UK emergency planning will be improved if planners have a better understanding of the reasons UK HCWs may have for their absenteeism, and what might motivate them to work during an influenza pandemic.

          This paper reports the results of a qualitative study that explored UK HCWs' views (n = 64) about working during an influenza pandemic, in order to identify factors that might influence their willingness and ability to work and to identify potential sources of any perceived duty on HCWs to work.

          Methods

          A qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 9) and interviews (n = 5).

          Results

          HCWs across a range of roles and grades tended to feel motivated by a sense of obligation to work through an influenza pandemic. A number of significant barriers that may prevent them from doing so were also identified. Perceived barriers to the ability to work included being ill oneself, transport difficulties, and childcare responsibilities. Perceived barriers to the willingness to work included: prioritising the wellbeing of family members; a lack of trust in, and goodwill towards, the NHS; a lack of information about the risks and what is expected of them during the crisis; fear of litigation; and the feeling that employers do not take the needs of staff seriously. Barriers to ability and barriers to willingness, however, are difficult to separate out.

          Conclusion

          Although our participants tended to feel a general obligation to work during an influenza pandemic, there are barriers to working, which, if generalisable, may significantly reduce the NHS workforce during a pandemic. The barriers identified are both barriers to willingness and to ability. This suggests that pandemic planning needs to take into account the possibility that staff may be absent for reasons beyond those currently anticipated in UK planning documents. In particular, staff who are physically able to attend work may nonetheless be unwilling to do so. Although there are some barriers that cannot be mitigated by employers (such as illness, transport infrastructure etc.), there are a number of remedial steps that can be taken to lesson the impact of others (providing accommodation, building reciprocity, provision of information and guidance etc). We suggest that barriers to working lie along an ability/willingness continuum, and that absenteeism may be reduced by taking steps to prevent barriers to willingness becoming perceived barriers to ability.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Focus Groups in Social Research

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Health care workers' ability and willingness to report to duty during catastrophic disasters.

            Catastrophic disasters create surge capacity needs for health care systems. This is especially true in the urban setting because the high population density and reliance on complex urban infrastructures (e.g., mass transit systems and high rise buildings) could adversely affect the ability to meet surge capacity needs. To better understand responsiveness in this setting, we conducted a survey of health care workers (HCWs) (N =6,428) from 47 health care facilities in New York City and the surrounding metropolitan region to determine their ability and willingness to report to work during various catastrophic events. A range of facility types and sizes were represented in the sample. Results indicate that HCWs were most able to report to work for a mass casualty incident (MCI) (83%), environmental disaster (81%), and chemical event (71%) and least able to report during a smallpox epidemic (69%), radiological event (64%), sudden acute respiratory distress syndrome (SARS) outbreak (64%), or severe snow storm (49%). In terms of willingness, HCWs were most willing to report during a snow storm (80%), MCI (86%), and environmental disaster (84%) and least willing during a SARS outbreak (48%), radiological event (57%), smallpox epidemic (61%), and chemical event (68%). Barriers to ability included transportation problems, child care, eldercare, and pet care obligations. Barriers to willingness included fear and concern for family and self and personal health problems. The findings were consistent for all types of facilities. Importantly, many of the barriers identified are amenable to interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Research methods in health: investigating health and health services

              N. Bowling (2003)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central
                1471-2458
                2009
                12 February 2009
                : 9
                : 56
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Centre for Biomedical Ethics, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
                [2 ]Primary Care Clinical Sciences, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
                [3 ]Department of Public Health, Epidemiology & Biostatistics, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
                [4 ]Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
                [5 ]Centre for the Study of Global Ethics, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
                Article
                1471-2458-9-56
                10.1186/1471-2458-9-56
                2654560
                19216738
                78a6919d-2c4b-4b1a-ab46-e6d8877bde95
                Copyright © 2009 Ives et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 October 2008
                : 12 February 2009
                Categories
                Research Article

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article