Public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of community organisations and networks in the Netherlands (2020-2021): five lessons for pandemic decision-making.

Carla Kolner, Wieke van der Borg, Jet Sanders, Jolanda Keijsers, Maysa Joosten, Marijn de Bruin
{"title":"Public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic through the lens of community organisations and networks in the Netherlands (2020-2021): five lessons for pandemic decision-making.","authors":"Carla Kolner,&nbsp;Wieke van der Borg,&nbsp;Jet Sanders,&nbsp;Jolanda Keijsers,&nbsp;Maysa Joosten,&nbsp;Marijn de Bruin","doi":"10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.42.2200242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundDuring the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, key persons who were formally or informally active in community organisations and networks, such as sports clubs or cultural, educational, day care and healthcare facilities, occupied a key position between governments and citizens. However, their experiences, the dilemmas they faced and the solutions they generated when implementing COVID-19 measures in their respective settings are understudied.AimWe aimed to understand how key persons in different community organisations and networks experienced and responded to the COVID-19 measures in the Netherlands.MethodsBetween October 2020 and December 2021, the Corona Behavioural Unit at the Dutch national public health institute, conducted qualitative research based on narratives derived from 65 in-depth interviews with 95 key persons from 32 organisations and networks in eight different sectors.ResultsFirstly, key persons enhanced adherence and supported the resilience and well-being of people involved in their settings. Secondly, adherence was negatively affected where COVID-19 measures conflicted with important organisational goals and values. Thirdly, small changes and ambiguities in COVID-19 policy had substantial consequences, depending on the context. Fourthly, problem-solving was achieved through trial-and-error, peer support, co-creation and transparent communication. Lastly, the COVID-19 pandemic and measures highlighted inequalities in access to resources.ConclusionPandemic preparedness requires organisational and community preparedness and a multidisciplinary public health approach. Structural engagement of governments with key persons in community organisations and networks is key to enhance public trust and adherence to pandemic measures and contributes to health equity and the well-being of the people involved.</p>","PeriodicalId":520613,"journal":{"name":"Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9585880/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.42.2200242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundDuring the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, key persons who were formally or informally active in community organisations and networks, such as sports clubs or cultural, educational, day care and healthcare facilities, occupied a key position between governments and citizens. However, their experiences, the dilemmas they faced and the solutions they generated when implementing COVID-19 measures in their respective settings are understudied.AimWe aimed to understand how key persons in different community organisations and networks experienced and responded to the COVID-19 measures in the Netherlands.MethodsBetween October 2020 and December 2021, the Corona Behavioural Unit at the Dutch national public health institute, conducted qualitative research based on narratives derived from 65 in-depth interviews with 95 key persons from 32 organisations and networks in eight different sectors.ResultsFirstly, key persons enhanced adherence and supported the resilience and well-being of people involved in their settings. Secondly, adherence was negatively affected where COVID-19 measures conflicted with important organisational goals and values. Thirdly, small changes and ambiguities in COVID-19 policy had substantial consequences, depending on the context. Fourthly, problem-solving was achieved through trial-and-error, peer support, co-creation and transparent communication. Lastly, the COVID-19 pandemic and measures highlighted inequalities in access to resources.ConclusionPandemic preparedness requires organisational and community preparedness and a multidisciplinary public health approach. Structural engagement of governments with key persons in community organisations and networks is key to enhance public trust and adherence to pandemic measures and contributes to health equity and the well-being of the people involved.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

从荷兰社区组织和网络的角度看2019冠状病毒病大流行期间的公共卫生措施(2020-2021年):大流行决策的五个经验教训
背景在2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行期间,体育俱乐部或文化、教育、日托和保健设施等社区组织和网络中正式或非正式活跃的关键人物在政府和公民之间占据了关键地位。然而,他们在各自环境中实施COVID-19措施时的经验、面临的困境以及产生的解决方案却没有得到充分研究。AimWe旨在了解荷兰不同社区组织和网络中的关键人物如何体验和应对2019冠状病毒病措施。方法在2020年10月至2021年12月期间,荷兰国家公共卫生研究所的科罗娜行为部门根据对来自8个不同部门的32个组织和网络的95名关键人物的65次深度访谈的叙述进行了定性研究。结果:首先,关键人员增强了依从性,并支持了参与其环境的人员的复原力和幸福感。其次,当COVID-19措施与重要的组织目标和价值观相冲突时,依从性受到负面影响。第三,根据具体情况,COVID-19政策的微小变化和含糊不清会产生重大后果。第四,通过试错、同伴支持、共同创造和透明沟通,解决了问题。最后,2019冠状病毒病大流行及其措施凸显了获取资源方面的不平等。大流行防范需要组织和社区准备以及多学科公共卫生方法。政府与社区组织和网络中的关键人物进行结构性接触,是增强公众信任和遵守大流行病措施的关键,并有助于卫生公平和相关人员的福祉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信