Department of Anthropology, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 1018, WV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Gustav III:s Boulevard 40, 169 73, Solna, Sweden.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 May 11;20(1):411. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05298-z.
This paper describes a participatory methodology that supports investigation of the synergistic collaboration between communities affected by infectious disease outbreak events and relevant official institutions. The core principle underlying the methodology is the recognition that synergistic relationships, characterised by mutual trust and respect, between affected communities and official institutions provide the most effective means of addressing outbreak situations.
The methodological approach and lessons learned were derived from four qualitative case studies including (i) two tick-borne disease events (Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever in Spain, 2016, and tick-borne encephalitis in the Netherlands, 2016); and (ii) two outbreaks of acute gastroenteritis (norovirus in Iceland, 2017, and verocytotoxin-producing Escherichia coli [VTEC] in Ireland, 2018). An after-event qualitative case study approach was taken using mixed methods. The studies were conducted in collaboration with the respective national public health authorities in the affected countries by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). The analysis focused on the specific actions undertaken by the participating countries' public health and other authorities in relation to community engagement, as well as the view from the perspective of affected communities.
Lessons highlight the critical importance of collaborating with ECDC National Focal Points during preparation and planning and with anthropological experts. Field work for each case study was conducted over one working week, which although limiting the number of individuals and institutions involved, still allowed for rich data collection due to the close collaboration with local authorities. The methodology enabled efficient extraction of synergies between authorities and communities. Implementing the methodology required a reflexivity among fieldworkers that ackowledges that different versions of reality can co-exist in the social domain. The method allowed for potential generalisability across studies. Issues of extra attention included insider-outsider perspectives, politically sensitivity of findings, and how to deal with ethical and language issues.
The overall objective of the assessment is to identify synergies between institutional decision-making bodies and community actors and networks before, during and after an outbreak response to a given public health emergency. The methodology is generic and could be applied to a range of public health emergencies, zoonotic or otherwise.
本文描述了一种参与式方法,该方法支持调查受传染病暴发事件影响的社区与相关官方机构之间的协同合作。该方法的核心原则是认识到受影响社区与官方机构之间建立相互信任和尊重的协同关系是应对疫情的最有效手段。
该方法学方法和经验教训源自四项定性案例研究,包括(一)两起蜱传疾病事件(西班牙 2016 年发生的克里米亚-刚果出血热和荷兰 2016 年发生的蜱传脑炎);以及(二)两起急性肠胃炎暴发(冰岛 2017 年诺如病毒和爱尔兰 2018 年产志贺毒素大肠埃希氏菌)。采用混合方法进行事后定性案例研究。这些研究是由欧洲疾病预防控制中心(ECDC)与受影响国家的国家公共卫生当局合作进行的。分析侧重于参与国家公共卫生和其他当局在社区参与方面采取的具体行动,以及受影响社区的观点。
经验教训突出了在准备和规划阶段与 ECDC 国家联络点以及与人类学专家合作的重要性。每个案例研究的实地工作持续一周,尽管这限制了参与的个人和机构的数量,但由于与地方当局的密切合作,仍允许进行丰富的数据收集。该方法能够有效地提取当局与社区之间的协同作用。实施该方法需要现场工作人员具有反思性,承认不同版本的现实可以同时存在于社会领域。该方法允许在研究之间进行潜在的推广。需要特别注意的问题包括内部人员和外部人员的观点、研究结果的政治敏感性,以及如何处理伦理和语言问题。
评估的总体目标是在疫情应对的事前、事中和事后识别机构决策机构与社区行动者和网络之间的协同作用,以应对特定的公共卫生紧急情况。该方法是通用的,可以应用于一系列公共卫生紧急情况,包括动物源性或其他情况。