Gershon Robyn R M, Kraus Lewis E, Raveis Victoria H, Sherman Martin F, Kailes June I
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Am J Disaster Med. 2013 Winter;8(1):35-47. doi: 10.5055/ajdm.2013.0109.
The objective of this study was to characterize emergency preparedness in this vulnerable population, and to ascertain the role of the personal assistant (PA) and the potential impact of prior emergency experience on preparedness efforts.
Cross-sectional Internet-based survey conducted in 2011.
Convenience sample.
Two-hundred fifty-three community residents with cognitive and /or physical disabilities, all receiving personal assistance services.
Emergency preparedness, operationalized as responses to a seven-item scale.
The mean score for the emergency preparedness scale was 2.32 (SD = 2.74), range 0-7. Even though 62.8 percent (n = 159) of the participants had previously experienced one or more large-scale emergencies, only 47.4 percent (n = 120) of the entire sample and 55.3 percent (n = 88) of those with actual emergency experience reported preparing an emergency plan. Sixty-three percent (n = 76) of those reporting a plan had involved their PA in its development. Participants who reported such involvement were significantly more likely to have higher scores on the emergency preparedness scale (p < 0.001). Participants who had experienced a prior emergency were also more likely to score higher on the emergency preparedness scale (p < 0.001). In general, participants reported limited attention to other basic preparedness recommendations: only 28 percent (n = 70) had prepared a "go-bag" with necessary supplies, 29 percent (n = 74) had developed a strategy for communicating with their PA during emergencies, and 32 percent (n = 81) had stockpiled emergency supplies. Of particular importance, only 26 percent (n = 66) had made alternative back-up plans for personal assistance.
Involving the PA in the planning process and experiencing an emergency were both significantly associated with higher emergency preparedness scores in this sample of people living with disabilities. However, critical deficiencies in preparedness were noted, such as lack of back-up plans for replacing their PA. Despite a concerted national effort to improve preparedness in the population of people living with disabilities, important preparedness gaps remain. These findings highlight the need for additional study on emergency preparedness barriers in people living with disabilities so that effective strategies to reduce vulnerabilities can be identified.
本研究的目的是描述这一弱势群体的应急准备情况,确定私人助理(PA)的作用以及以往应急经历对准备工作的潜在影响。
2011年进行的基于互联网的横断面调查。
便利样本。
253名有认知和/或身体残疾且均接受个人援助服务的社区居民。
应急准备情况,通过对一个包含七个条目的量表的回答来衡量。
应急准备量表的平均分为2.32(标准差=2.74),范围为0至7。尽管62.8%(n = 159)的参与者此前经历过一次或多次大规模紧急情况,但整个样本中只有47.4%(n = 120)的人以及有实际应急经历的人中只有55.3%(n = 88)的人报告制定了应急计划。报告制定了计划的人中有63%(n = 76)让他们的私人助理参与了计划制定。报告有这种参与的参与者在应急准备量表上得分显著更高(p < 0.001)。有过先前应急经历的参与者在应急准备量表上得分也更有可能更高(p < 0.001)。总体而言,参与者报告对其他基本准备建议的关注有限:只有28%(n = 70)的人准备了装有必要物资的“应急包”,29%(n = 74)的人制定了在紧急情况下与私人助理沟通的策略,32%(n = 81)的人储备了应急物资。特别重要的是,只有26%(n = 66)的人制定了个人援助的替代备用计划。
在这个残疾人群体样本中,让私人助理参与规划过程和经历过紧急情况都与更高的应急准备得分显著相关。然而,注意到准备工作存在严重不足,例如缺乏替换私人助理的备用计划。尽管国家为改善残疾人群体的准备工作做出了一致努力,但重要的准备差距仍然存在。这些发现凸显了对残疾人群体应急准备障碍进行更多研究的必要性,以便能够确定减少脆弱性的有效策略。