Perspectives from Spanish infectious diseases professionals on 2009 A (H1N1) influenza: the third half

Abstract

The first influenza pandemic in more than 40 years was declared in 2009. We aimed to evaluate the beliefs of Spanish infectious diseases professionals regarding several aspects of 2009 A (H1N1) influenza once the epidemic waned. An online survey was designed and distributed among members of the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC). The survey considered hospital organization and preparedness planning and conduct, as well as the opinion of the infectious diseases professionals regarding several key issues. Between 7 March and 22 March 2010, 303 responses, corresponding to 12.8% of the SEIMC membership, were received. Of the respondents, 48.2% were microbiologists and 42.3% were clinicians dealing with infectious diseases. Forty-one per cent of respondents did not believe that 2009 A (H1N1) influenza had a more severe presentation than other seasonal influenzas. Only 5% fully agreed that 2009 A (H1N1) influenza had a more severe presentation. Influenza planning was available in 69.7% of represented institutions before the arrival of 2009 A (H1N1) influenza, and was considered to be useful, to different extents, by most professionals. In most institutions (88.3%), a multidisciplinary team was created to coordinate local pandemic influenza actions. The most successful protocols were those provided by regional healthcare authorities, followed by those from the CDC. The most problematic issues regarding 2009 A (H1N1) influenza were the management of patients in the emergency room and the vaccination and awareness of healthcare professionals (HCPs) regarding infection control. Microbiological diagnosis and the availability of antivirals were the least problematic areas. Although the majority of surveyed infectious diseases professionals did not believe that 2009 A (H1N1) influenza had an especially severe presentation, most of them agreed with the way that this epidemic was managed in their institutions.

Managing an Online Survey about Influenza Vaccination in Primary Healthcare Workers

“…The overall response rate to the survey was 36.2%, similar to the mean response rates reported by other studies using a similar study population and online surveys [ 22 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ].…”

“…Sending four reminders during the study increased the response rate and further underlined the importance of sending reminders in studies using online surveys [ 27 , 30 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. There is a consensus that the first reminder should be sent between days 8 and 12 [ 23 , 28 , 34 , 35 ]. However, there is no consensus on the total number of reminders.…”

“…However, there is no consensus on the total number of reminders. Some authors [ 22 ] consider that one reminder is sufficient while others [ 26 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 34 ] suggest two or four reminders should be sent. Other studies coincide with our results in showing that the greatest increase in the response rate was observed after the first reminder [ 23 , 35 , 36 ].…”

Factors associated with acceptance of pandemic flu vaccine by healthcare professionals in Spain, 2009–2010

“…Additionally, the use of online surveys in studies aimed at healthcare workers have many advantages: they collect information in real time, have a low cost, facilitate contact with scattered groups, make results easier to analyze, may eliminate interviewer bias, and may be carried out more rapidly than other techniques (Biemer, ; Dillman, Smyth, & Christian, ; Toledo et al, ; Van Gelder, Bretveld, & Roeleveld, ). Our survey response rate of 36.2% was similar to the mean response rates reported by others using a similar study population and online surveys (Minniear, McIntosh, Alexander, Weidle, & Fulton, ; Paño‐Pardo et al, ).…”

Estudio actitudes sobre vacunación antigripal en profesionales sanitarios de atención primaria de Cataluña

“…El hecho de excluir a los profesionales con contraindicaciones o con indicaciones por enfermedad crónica para recibir la vacuna hace que la muestra sea más representativa del personal sanitario candidato a recibir la vacuna por motivos profesionales. El grado de respuesta obtenido (38,8%) en nuestra encuesta se encuentra dentro del porcentaje previsible 15 , y algo superior al obtenido por el estudio a nivel estatal (36,2%)14, 17. Esta tasa de respuesta podría suponer un sesgo de respondedores con una mayor tasa de respuesta entre los profesionales vacunados y a favor de la vacuna.…”