Willingness to Respond to Radiological Disasters Among First Responders in St. Louis, Missouri

• Published in: Health security Vol. 18; no. 4; p. 318
• Main Authors: Turner, James Austin, Rebmann, Terri, Loux, Travis M, Charney, Rachel L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.08.2020
• Subjects: Attitude of Health Personnel; Disasters; Emergency Responders - psychology; Hazardous Waste Sites; Humans; Missouri; Nuclear Weapons; Radioactive Hazard Release - psychology; Radioactive Waste; Self Efficacy; Surveys and Questionnaires; Terrorism - psychology; Missouri; Willingness to respond; First responders; Disasters; Dirty bomb; Radiation
• ISSN: 2326-5108
• DOI: 10.1089/hs.2019.0160

During radiological disasters, firefighters and emergency medical services personnel are expected to report to work and engage in response activities; however, prior research exploring willingness to respond to radiological disasters among first responders has considered only radiological terrorism scenarios and not nonterrorism radiological scenarios. The goal of this study was to compare willingness to respond to terrorism and nonterrorism radiological disaster scenarios among first responders in St. Louis, Missouri, and to explore determinants of willingness to respond. Firefighters and emergency medical services personnel were surveyed about their willingness to respond to a dirty bomb detonation (terrorism) and a radioactive landfill fire (nonterrorism). McNemar's tests were used to assess differences in individual willingness to respond between the 2 scenarios and differences if requested versus required to respond. Chi-square tests were used to identify significant individual predictors of willingness to respond. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to determine final models of willingness to respond for both scenarios. Willingness to respond was lower for the dirty bomb scenario than the landfill scenario if requested (68.4% vs 73.0%;  < .05). For both scenarios, willingness to respond was lower if requested versus required to respond (dirty bomb: 68.4% vs 85.2%,  < .001; landfill: 73.0% vs 87.3%,  < .001). Normative beliefs, perceived susceptibility, self-efficacy, and perceived barriers were significant predictors of willingness to respond in the final models. Willingness to respond among first responders differed significantly between terrorism and nonterrorism radiological disasters and if requested versus required to respond. Willingness to respond may be increased through interventions targeting significant attitudinal and belief predictors and by establishing organizational policies that define expectations of employee response during disasters.