↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare workers' attitudes to working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
178 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Healthcare workers' attitudes to working during pandemic influenza: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-9-56
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan Ives, Sheila Greenfield, Jayne M Parry, Heather Draper, Christine Gratus, Judith I Petts, Tom Sorell, Sue Wilson

Abstract

Healthcare workers (HCWs) will play a key role in any response to pandemic influenza, and the UK healthcare system's ability to cope during an influenza pandemic will depend, to a large extent, on the number of HCWs who are able and willing to work through the crisis. UK emergency planning will be improved if planners have a better understanding of the reasons UK HCWs may have for their absenteeism, and what might motivate them to work during an influenza pandemic.This paper reports the results of a qualitative study that explored UK HCWs' views (n = 64) about working during an influenza pandemic, in order to identify factors that might influence their willingness and ability to work and to identify potential sources of any perceived duty on HCWs to work. A qualitative study, using focus groups (n = 9) and interviews (n = 5). HCWs across a range of roles and grades tended to feel motivated by a sense of obligation to work through an influenza pandemic. A number of significant barriers that may prevent them from doing so were also identified. Perceived barriers to the ability to work included being ill oneself, transport difficulties, and childcare responsibilities. Perceived barriers to the willingness to work included: prioritising the wellbeing of family members; a lack of trust in, and goodwill towards, the NHS; a lack of information about the risks and what is expected of them during the crisis; fear of litigation; and the feeling that employers do not take the needs of staff seriously. Barriers to ability and barriers to willingness, however, are difficult to separate out. Although our participants tended to feel a general obligation to work during an influenza pandemic, there are barriers to working, which, if generalisable, may significantly reduce the NHS workforce during a pandemic. The barriers identified are both barriers to willingness and to ability. This suggests that pandemic planning needs to take into account the possibility that staff may be absent for reasons beyond those currently anticipated in UK planning documents. In particular, staff who are physically able to attend work may nonetheless be unwilling to do so. Although there are some barriers that cannot be mitigated by employers (such as illness, transport infrastructure etc.), there are a number of remedial steps that can be taken to lesson the impact of others (providing accommodation, building reciprocity, provision of information and guidance etc). We suggest that barriers to working lie along an ability/willingness continuum, and that absenteeism may be reduced by taking steps to prevent barriers to willingness becoming perceived barriers to ability.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 175 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 11%
Researcher 20 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 7%
Other 43 24%
Unknown 26 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 11%
Social Sciences 15 8%
Psychology 12 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 6%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 41 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,886,849
of 15,248,333 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,249
of 10,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,758
of 379,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#206
of 839 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,248,333 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 379,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 839 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.