Monitoring of risk perceptions and correlates of precautionary behaviour related to human avian influenza during 2006 - 2007 in the Netherlands: results of seven consecutive surveys

Abstract

BackgroundAvian influenza (AI) is a public health challenge because of ongoing spread and pandemic potential. Non-pharmaceutical measures are important to prevent the spread of AI and to contain a pandemic. The effectiveness of such measures is largely dependent on the behaviour of the population. Risk perception is a central element in changing behaviour. This study aimed to investigate perceived vulnerability, severity and precautionary behaviour related to AI in the Netherlands during seven consecutive surveys in 2006 - 2007 as well as possible trends in risk perception and self-reported precautionary behaviours.MethodsSeven web-based surveys were conducted including 3,840 respondents over a one-year period. Time trends were analyzed with linear regression analyses. Multivariate analysis was used to study determinants of precautionary behaviour.ResultsWhile infection with AI was considered a very severe health problem with mean score of 4.57 (scale 1 - 5); perceived vulnerability was much lower, with a mean score of 1.69. While perceived severity remained high, perceived vulnerability decreased slightly during a one-year period covering part of 2006 and 2007. Almost half of the respondents (46%) reported taking one or more preventive measures, with 36% reporting to have stayed away from (wild) birds or poultry. In multivariate logistic regression analysis the following factors were significantly associated with taking preventive measures: time of the survey, higher age, lower level of education, non-Dutch ethnicity, vaccinated against influenza, higher perceived severity, higher perceived vulnerability, higher self efficacy, lower level of knowledge, more information about AI, and thinking more about AI. Self efficacy was a stronger predictor of precautionary behaviour for those who never or seldom think about AI (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.9 - 2.7), compared to those who think about AI more often (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2 - 1.9).ConclusionsThe fact that perceived severity of AI appears to be high and remains so over time offers a good point of departure for more specific risk communications to promote precautionary actions. Such communications should aim at improving knowledge about the disease and preventive actions, and focus on perceived personal vulnerability and self efficacy in taking preventive measures.

Avian influenza A/H7N9 risk perception, information trust and adoption of protective behaviours among poultry farmers in Jiangsu Province, China

“…This is consistent with one previous study conducted in The Netherlands which found that over 90% of the respondents perceived that avian influenza was a serious disease (mean score = 4.57, scale 1–5) but only 0.7% of them perceived themselves to be highly vulnerable to avian influenza (mean score = 1.69, scale 1–5) [48]. Chinese poultry farmers report more familiarity with poultry disease risk than do urbanites and are more optimistic about avoiding avian influenzas [12, 13].…”

The influenza A (H1N1) pandemic in Reunion Island: knowledge, perceived risk and precautionary behaviour

“…Young adults (18–29 years) appeared as being the most active in terms of prevention, in contrast to other studies which reported elderly people to be more active in applying preventive measures [5,28,29]. Young adults were 8 times more likely to undertake preventive measures than other age groups.…”

“…One interpretation might be that young adults could have reacted well once they realized that they were more exposed to influenza A (H1N1) than other age groups. The research into behavioural attitudes over an extended period during influenza epidemics shows that people are highly adaptive and that their attitudes evolve over time [4,5]. …”

Factors Influencing Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Risk Perceptions in the General Population, Southeast Iran

“…We found a strong association between holding a university graduate certificate or having high school education and the probability of reporting a 'high' CCHF perceived risk. Studies have shown that individuals with less formal education are less likely to understand and interpret risk information in a proper manner (13,14). Our findings are consistent with results from a previous study that showed an inverse relationship between the level of education and the risk of CCHF infection (15).…”