2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Determining factors on volunteers' presence in hospital response to disasters and emergencies: 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:

          Volunteers' presence, as a critical issue in hospital response to disasters and emergencies, helps to readiness and quick response to the phenomena, preventing deaths caused by such incidences. This study aimed to determine the main factors affecting popular volunteers' presence in hospital response to disasters and emergencies in Iran.

          Methods:

          This qualitative study, conducted on 31 semi-structured interviews during the years 2019 and 2020, concerning emergency specialist working in various health organization nationwide between June 2019 and April 2020. The non-structured and semi-structured interviews were adopted to gather concept code and analyzed using Graneheim recommendation method.

          Results:

          Four main categories, identified as effective factors on volunteers' presence in hospital response to disasters and emergencies, including nine subcategories: (1) organizing and managing volunteers (with two sub-categories: (a) calling and registering volunteers, and (b) identifying volunteers' ability); (2) organizational structure (with two sub-categories: (a) operational planning and (b) coordination and communication); (3) training (with two sub-categories: (a) training in disasters and (b) volunteer training); and (4) volunteer challenges (with three sub-categories: (a) volunteer interaction with organizations, (b) volunteer logistics, and (c) volunteering culture).

          Conclusions:

          Exploring effective factors as regards volunteers' presence in hospital response phase in disasters to adopt a policy based on the experiences of managers and heads of health can help planners to provide effective design and implementation. It can scientifically contribute to disaster risk management and hospital emergency response in Iran.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

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

          Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness.

          Qualitative content analysis as described in published literature shows conflicting opinions and unsolved issues regarding meaning and use of concepts, procedures and interpretation. This paper provides an overview of important concepts (manifest and latent content, unit of analysis, meaning unit, condensation, abstraction, content area, code, category and theme) related to qualitative content analysis; illustrates the use of concepts related to the research procedure; and proposes measures to achieve trustworthiness (credibility, dependability and transferability) throughout the steps of the research procedure. Interpretation in qualitative content analysis is discussed in light of Watzlawick et al.'s [Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, London] theory of communication.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: quality and the idea of qualitative research.

            In this paper, I call into question the widely-held assumption of a single, more or less unified paradigm of 'qualitative research' whose methodologies share certain epistemological and ontological characteristics, and explore the implications of this position for judgements about the quality of research studies. After a quarter of a century of debate in nursing about how best to judge the quality of qualitative research, we appear to be no closer to a consensus, or even to deciding whether it is appropriate to try to achieve a consensus. The literature on this issue can be broadly divided into three positions: those writers who wish qualitative research to be judged according to the same criteria as quantitative research; those who believe that a different set of criteria is required; and those who question the appropriateness of any predetermined criteria for judging qualitative research. Of the three positions, the second appears to have generated most debate, and a number of different frameworks and guidelines for judging the quality of qualitative research have been devised over recent years. The second of the above positions is rejected in favour of the third. It argues that, if there is no unified qualitative research paradigm, then it makes little sense to attempt to establish a set of generic criteria for making quality judgements about qualitative research studies. We need either to acknowledge that the commonly perceived quantitative-qualitative dichotomy is in fact a continuum which requires a continuum of quality criteria, or to recognize that each study is individual and unique, and that the task of producing frameworks and predetermined criteria for assessing the quality of research studies is futile. Some of the implications of this latter position are explored, including the requirement that all published research reports should include a reflexive research diary.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Global injury morbidity and mortality from 1990 to 2017: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

              Background Past research in population health trends has shown that injuries form a substantial burden of population health loss. Regular updates to injury burden assessments are critical. We report Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 Study estimates on morbidity and mortality for all injuries. Methods We reviewed results for injuries from the GBD 2017 study. GBD 2017 measured injury-specific mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) using the Cause of Death Ensemble model. To measure non-fatal injuries, GBD 2017 modelled injury-specific incidence and converted this to prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs). YLLs and YLDs were summed to calculate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Findings In 1990, there were 4 260 493 (4 085 700 to 4 396 138) injury deaths, which increased to 4 484 722 (4 332 010 to 4 585 554) deaths in 2017, while age-standardised mortality decreased from 1079 (1073 to 1086) to 738 (730 to 745) per 100 000. In 1990, there were 354 064 302 (95% uncertainty interval: 338 174 876 to 371 610 802) new cases of injury globally, which increased to 520 710 288 (493 430 247 to 547 988 635) new cases in 2017. During this time, age-standardised incidence decreased non-significantly from 6824 (6534 to 7147) to 6763 (6412 to 7118) per 100 000. Between 1990 and 2017, age-standardised DALYs decreased from 4947 (4655 to 5233) per 100 000 to 3267 (3058 to 3505). Interpretation Injuries are an important cause of health loss globally, though mortality has declined between 1990 and 2017. Future research in injury burden should focus on prevention in high-burden populations, improving data collection and ensuring access to medical care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Inj Violence Res
                J Inj Violence Res
                kums
                Journal of Injury and Violence Research
                Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences
                2008-2053
                2008-4072
                July 2021
                : 13
                : 2
                : 127-140
                Affiliations
                a Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran.
                b Skull Base Research Center, Loghman Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
                c Department of Health in Emergencies and Disasters, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
                Author notes
                [* ] Corresponding Author at: Davoud Khorasani-Zavareh: Skull Base Research Center, Loghman Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Email: Davoud.khorasani@ 123456gmail.com (Khorasani-Zavareh D.). https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6265-8148
                [* ] Corresponding Author at: Iraj Mohebbi: Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran; Email: irajmohebbi@ 123456umsu.ac.ir (Mohebbi I.). https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9158-5742
                Article
                10.5249/jivr.vol13i2.1583
                8435082
                c509f48f-3903-4ef0-9191-11a1a4a0e541

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 10 August 2020
                : 23 May 2021
                Categories
                Injury &Violence
                Disasters
                Emergencies
                Hospital Response

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                disasters,emergencies,hospital response,volunteers
                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                disasters, emergencies, hospital response, volunteers

                Comments

                Comment on this article