Expanding Methodologies to Identify High-Priority Emergency Preparedness Tools for Implementation in Public Health Agencies

• Published in: American journal of public health (1971) Vol. 108; no. S5; pp. S372 - S374
• Main Authors: Revere, Debra, Allan, Susan, Karasz, Hilary, Baseman, Janet
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Public Health Association 01.11.2018
• Subjects: AJPH s; Anniversaries; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.); Civil Defense; Communication; Communications; Communications systems; Delphi method; Disaster Planning - methods; Disaster Planning - organization & administration; Disease control; Emergencies; Emergency management; Emergency preparedness; Emergency response; Experts; Feasibility; Humans; Implementation; Inventory; Morbidity; Objectives; Pandemics; Prevention; Public Health; Public Health Practice; Quality control; Quality improvement; Ratings & rankings; Research facilities; Teams; Text messaging; United States; United States
• ISSN: 0090-0036; 1541-0048; 1541-0048
• DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304796

From analysis of recent emergencies, a consistent finding is that communication is among the most important factors in emergency response effectiveness. Communications failures, contradictions, and delays among response partners, key authorities, and the community can contribute to avoidable morbidity and mortality.1 Through initiatives such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Preparedness and Emergency Response Research Center (PERRC) and Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center (PERLC) programs, trainings and tools to build the public health emergency preparedness and response (PHPR) system's workforce capacity, inform guidelines and policies, and improve PHPR communications have been developed and disseminated. Yet despite this and sweeping changes in the PHPR system since 9/11, communication remains a significant problem.2Moving research and evidence into practice to address ongoing challenges of communication breakdowns across phases ofan emergency situation is particularly urgent. A "translation gap" persists between the availability of PHPR tools and trainings and their adoption within public health agencies, which impacts continuous quality improvement initiatives. A recent inventory of evidence-based trainings developed through the PERLC program included 400 PHPR trainings.3We applied a systematic methodology to determine the quality, appropriateness, and feasibility of implementing new evidence-based PHPR communications tools and trainings in public health agencies. Our process was informed by the RAND/ UCLA Appropriateness Method- a modified Delphi method for obtaining group consensus on a treatment or protocol from subject matter experts.4 Our modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method approach included: conducting a landscape assessment of PHPR communications-focused products, mapping products against strategic PHPR communications objectives, rating products' implementation feasibility and appropriateness, and convening a panel of subject matter experts to reach consensus on a final set of PHPR products considered highest implementation priority to improve PHPR communications.