Understanding risk communication for prevention and control of vector-borne diseases: A mixed-method study in Curaçao.
Adolescent
Adult
Chikungunya Fever
/ epidemiology
Communicable Disease Control
Communication
Cross-Sectional Studies
Curacao
Dengue
/ epidemiology
Disease Outbreaks
Female
Focus Groups
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Research Design
Surveys and Questionnaires
Vector Borne Diseases
/ enzymology
Young Adult
Journal
PLoS neglected tropical diseases
ISSN: 1935-2735
Titre abrégé: PLoS Negl Trop Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101291488
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2020
04 2020
Historique:
received:
07
08
2019
accepted:
11
02
2020
entrez:
14
4
2020
pubmed:
14
4
2020
medline:
7
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Risk communication (RC) is an essential tool for the prevention and control of diseases as it impacts risk perception, increases awareness and might change behaviour. It is the interactive exchange of information about risks among experts and people. Effective RC can minimize the impact that diseases such as dengue, chikungunya and Zika have on populations. This study aimed to understand RC regarding vector-borne diseases in its social context and from the viewpoint of the audience to strengthen RC strategies in Curaçao. In 2015, a cross-sectional mixed-method study applying focus group discussions (n = 7), in-depth interviews (n = 20) and a structured survey questionnaire (n = 339) was done in Curaçao. The study was designed based on the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behaviour. In addition, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework and the theory of cultural schemas were applied to understand RC in the social context. Television, radio and newspapers were the most important channels of information regarding dengue and chikungunya. Moreover, individuals also reported receiving information via social media, the internet and family/friends. Interestingly, the use of internet to obtain information diminished with age, while females were more likely to use internet compared to men. These key findings were statistically significant. An important outcome was that the risk perception towards chikungunya at the beginning of the outbreak was attenuated. This might be due to the (perceived) lack of RC before the epidemic. This same risk perception was amplified later during the outbreak by the increased exposure to information. Lastly, we show how cultural schemas influence people's perception regarding preventive measures and treatment of chikungunya and dengue. Data obtained emphasise the importance of understanding the user of media platforms and sharing information in a timely fashion through a transparent process with the content that convinces people of the seriousness of the matter.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Risk communication (RC) is an essential tool for the prevention and control of diseases as it impacts risk perception, increases awareness and might change behaviour. It is the interactive exchange of information about risks among experts and people. Effective RC can minimize the impact that diseases such as dengue, chikungunya and Zika have on populations. This study aimed to understand RC regarding vector-borne diseases in its social context and from the viewpoint of the audience to strengthen RC strategies in Curaçao.
METHODS
In 2015, a cross-sectional mixed-method study applying focus group discussions (n = 7), in-depth interviews (n = 20) and a structured survey questionnaire (n = 339) was done in Curaçao. The study was designed based on the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behaviour. In addition, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework and the theory of cultural schemas were applied to understand RC in the social context.
RESULTS
Television, radio and newspapers were the most important channels of information regarding dengue and chikungunya. Moreover, individuals also reported receiving information via social media, the internet and family/friends. Interestingly, the use of internet to obtain information diminished with age, while females were more likely to use internet compared to men. These key findings were statistically significant. An important outcome was that the risk perception towards chikungunya at the beginning of the outbreak was attenuated. This might be due to the (perceived) lack of RC before the epidemic. This same risk perception was amplified later during the outbreak by the increased exposure to information. Lastly, we show how cultural schemas influence people's perception regarding preventive measures and treatment of chikungunya and dengue.
CONCLUSIONS
Data obtained emphasise the importance of understanding the user of media platforms and sharing information in a timely fashion through a transparent process with the content that convinces people of the seriousness of the matter.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32282848
doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008136
pii: PNTD-D-19-01238
pmc: PMC7153856
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0008136Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Vaitiare Mulderij-Jansen, Izzy Gerstenbluth, Ashley Duits, Adriana Tami and Ajay Bailey are members of the ARBOCARIB project. Adriana Tami is the principal investigator of the project. The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016 Mar 3;12(3):716-31
pubmed: 26554522
Turk J Emerg Med. 2018 Aug 07;18(3):91-93
pubmed: 30191186
Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Sep;38:60-1
pubmed: 26216764
Viruses. 2017 Dec 01;9(12):
pubmed: 29194359
Risk Anal. 2006 Apr;26(2):437-54
pubmed: 16573632
Source Code Biol Med. 2008 Dec 16;3:17
pubmed: 19087314
Curr Opin Psychol. 2015 Oct 1;5:85-89
pubmed: 26258160
Malar J. 2014 Jul 02;13:249
pubmed: 24986165
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Sep;212:50-59
pubmed: 30005224
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Oct 9;11(10):e0005987
pubmed: 28991920
Health Educ Q. 1984 Spring;11(1):1-47
pubmed: 6392204
Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Apr;58(8):1149-55
pubmed: 24415636
Front Psychol. 2018 Aug 03;9:1330
pubmed: 30123153
J Infect Dis. 2017 Sep 1;216(5):573-581
pubmed: 28931219
Parasit Vectors. 2017 Sep 19;10(1):434
pubmed: 28927437
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Aug 30;11(8):e0005869
pubmed: 28854206
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jun 11;360(24):2536-43
pubmed: 19516034
PLoS One. 2017 Dec 4;12(12):e0187830
pubmed: 29200423
West Indian Med J. 2010 Mar;59(2):139-46
pubmed: 21132094
Elife. 2015 Jun 30;4:e08347
pubmed: 26126267
Health Commun. 2019 Apr;34(4):437-455
pubmed: 29558199
J Urban Health. 2001 Jun;78(2):382-91
pubmed: 11419589
NIDA Res Monogr. 1995;155:65-89
pubmed: 8594464
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Jul 25;11(7):e0005653
pubmed: 28742801
West Indian Med J. 2012 Jan;61(1):76-80
pubmed: 22808570
Lancet. 2016 May 21;387(10033):2125-2132
pubmed: 26993883
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018 Feb 09;4(1):e16
pubmed: 29426815
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2013;23(2):143-9
pubmed: 23894860
J Community Health. 2017 Apr;42(2):349-357
pubmed: 27655586
Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Aug 20;5:299-309
pubmed: 23990732
Zoonoses Public Health. 2016 Mar;63(2):129-37
pubmed: 26122819
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018 Aug 30;12(8):e0006708
pubmed: 30161130
Lancet. 2017 Nov 4;390(10107):2099-2109
pubmed: 28647173
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 Jun;16(6):712-723
pubmed: 26874619
Open Rheumatol J. 2016 Nov 30;10:129-140
pubmed: 28077980
Bull World Health Organ. 2018 Jun 01;96(6):402-413D
pubmed: 29904223
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 May 5;112(18):5631-6
pubmed: 25902519
BMJ Glob Health. 2017 Aug 15;2(3):e000296
pubmed: 29082006
Health Promot Int. 2015 Sep;30(3):736-45
pubmed: 23985248
Health Commun. 2020 Jan;35(1):35-45
pubmed: 30358431
Interact J Med Res. 2018 Jun 14;7(1):e11
pubmed: 29903698