Preparing for the unexpected: a comparative study of policies addressing post-terror health reactions in Norway and France.

Disasters Health contingency Healthcare systems Terrorism

Journal

International journal of mental health systems
ISSN: 1752-4458
Titre abrégé: Int J Ment Health Syst
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101294224

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
26 May 2023
Historique:
received: 11 02 2022
accepted: 18 05 2023
medline: 27 5 2023
pubmed: 27 5 2023
entrez: 26 5 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In the wake of terrorist attacks, protecting the health and psychosocial wellbeing of those affected and the general population, are important tasks for the healthcare system. The responses to such emergencies are often complex, including different phases and many actors, and may unveil insufficiencies that incite reforms to existing systems. Recently, initiatives have been promoted to strengthen cooperation and coordination regarding the governance of health threats in Europe. Comparative research is requested on how states prepare for health emergencies such as terrorist attacks. This study investigated how governments in two European countries with universal health coverage prepared to address the civilian population's health needs after terrorist attacks, and the factors that contributed to shaping their chosen approach. Utilizing document analysis and Walt and Gilson's model for the analysis of health policy, national plans for post-terror health responses in Norway and France were studied with a focus on context, process, content, and actors. Whereas target groups for psychosocial care and certain measures were similar in both cases, the contents of prescribed policies and the actors responsible for enacting them differed. One of the most distinct differences was to what extent specialized mental healthcare was relied upon to provide psychosocial follow-up in the emergency phase. In the French approach, specialized mental healthcare practitioners, such as psychiatrists, psychologists and psychiatric nurses, provided early psychosocial support. In contrast, the Norwegian approach relied on interdisciplinary primary care crisis teams in the local municipalities to provide early psychosocial support, with further involvement of specialized mental healthcare if this was considered necessary. Historical, political, and systemic differences contributed to the variation in the countries' responses. This comparative study highlights the complexity and diversity of health policy responses to terrorist attacks across countries. Moreover, challenges and opportunities for research and health management in response to such disasters, including possibilities and potential pitfalls for the coordination of this work across Europe. An important first step could be to map out existing services and practices across countries to better understand if and how common core elements for psychosocial follow-up might be implemented internationally.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In the wake of terrorist attacks, protecting the health and psychosocial wellbeing of those affected and the general population, are important tasks for the healthcare system. The responses to such emergencies are often complex, including different phases and many actors, and may unveil insufficiencies that incite reforms to existing systems. Recently, initiatives have been promoted to strengthen cooperation and coordination regarding the governance of health threats in Europe. Comparative research is requested on how states prepare for health emergencies such as terrorist attacks. This study investigated how governments in two European countries with universal health coverage prepared to address the civilian population's health needs after terrorist attacks, and the factors that contributed to shaping their chosen approach.
METHODS METHODS
Utilizing document analysis and Walt and Gilson's model for the analysis of health policy, national plans for post-terror health responses in Norway and France were studied with a focus on context, process, content, and actors.
RESULTS RESULTS
Whereas target groups for psychosocial care and certain measures were similar in both cases, the contents of prescribed policies and the actors responsible for enacting them differed. One of the most distinct differences was to what extent specialized mental healthcare was relied upon to provide psychosocial follow-up in the emergency phase. In the French approach, specialized mental healthcare practitioners, such as psychiatrists, psychologists and psychiatric nurses, provided early psychosocial support. In contrast, the Norwegian approach relied on interdisciplinary primary care crisis teams in the local municipalities to provide early psychosocial support, with further involvement of specialized mental healthcare if this was considered necessary. Historical, political, and systemic differences contributed to the variation in the countries' responses.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This comparative study highlights the complexity and diversity of health policy responses to terrorist attacks across countries. Moreover, challenges and opportunities for research and health management in response to such disasters, including possibilities and potential pitfalls for the coordination of this work across Europe. An important first step could be to map out existing services and practices across countries to better understand if and how common core elements for psychosocial follow-up might be implemented internationally.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37237417
doi: 10.1186/s13033-023-00582-x
pii: 10.1186/s13033-023-00582-x
pmc: PMC10214657
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

13

Subventions

Organisme : Norges Forskningsråd
ID : 288321
Organisme : Norges Forskningsråd
ID : 288321

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Int J Ment Health Syst. 2021 Mar 19;15(1):26
pubmed: 33741034
Health Policy. 2003 Mar;63(3):299-310
pubmed: 12595129
Br J Psychiatry. 2010 Jan;196(1):69-74
pubmed: 20044665
Health Res Policy Syst. 2014 Sep 23;12:55
pubmed: 25248956
Health Syst Transit. 2015;17(3):1-218, xvii
pubmed: 26766545
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Feb 20;10:65
pubmed: 30873048
Public Health Rep. 2006 Nov-Dec;121(6):737-45
pubmed: 17278409
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Aug;5(8):
pubmed: 32784215
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001 Sep;55(9):622-3
pubmed: 11511639
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Mar 24;22(1):390
pubmed: 35331222
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Jul 02;15:253
pubmed: 26135395
Am J Public Health. 2007 Apr;97 Suppl 1:S9-11
pubmed: 17413078
World Med Health Policy. 2022 Mar;14(1):102-120
pubmed: 34226853
Disasters. 2003 Dec;27(4):336-50
pubmed: 14725091
Health Syst Transit. 2013;15(8):1-162
pubmed: 24434287
Health Policy Plan. 1994 Dec;9(4):353-70
pubmed: 10139469
BMC Public Health. 2018 Dec 5;18(1):1344
pubmed: 30518348

Auteurs

Lisa Govasli Nilsen (LG)

Norwegian Center for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway. l.g.nilsen@nkvts.no.
Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway. l.g.nilsen@nkvts.no.

Lise Eilin Stene (LE)

Norwegian Center for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway.

Classifications MeSH