Publication
Pandemic information preparedness self-assessment among health professionals in two EU countries [abstract]
| Summary: | Background The healthcare sector relies on healthcare professionals (HCPs) to promote prevention and control. Their views on health hazards influence public perceptions. The study aims to explore the under-researched area of HCPs’ confidence in preparedness and response and the quality of information they received during the pandemic. Methods A convenience cohort of 1286 HCPs in Bulgaria and Portugal completed a survey. Using a Likert scale, participants assessed a set of competencies and needs related to their ability to support communication during crises. Participants were asked to select sources of information used for their personal needs and medical practices. Quantitative methods were used to analyze independent factors. Results Communication competency self-assessment shows HCPs feel confident about their skills to disseminate lifesaving advice (x ̅=4.12) but express doubts when selecting their sources of information (x ̅=3.60, where 5 indicates the highest level of knowledge). No significant differences were found between the two countries. There is an association between confidence and age as younger HCPs evaluated their skills with lower average score (x ̅21-30=3.98, x ̅31-40=4.16, x ̅41-50=4.18, x ̅51-60=4.21, x ̅60 + =3.98 p = 0.006). The analysis revealed official channels are predominantly used, but a considerable share of HCPs ranks social networks and informal exchange among their preferred sources of information (8.62% and 10.37% in Bulgaria and 8.18% and 10.28% in Portugal, respectively). For medical practice, Bulgarian HCPs relied mostly on scientific publications (40%), while their Portuguese colleagues primarily used the instructions from the Ministry of Health (62%). Conclusions Despite the great cultural differences between the two countries, both groups of HCPs self-evaluate their skills in communication at a high level. However, we identified major gaps in communication competencies, which remain far below the optimal levels for preparedness. Key messages • The relatively high share of HCPs relying on information from informal sources in both countries researched raises concerns about potential proliferation of misinformation through HCPs’ authority. • It is imperative that the skills of selecting information sources in the event of a health emergency and the ability of HCPs to use and relay them are trained and much better prepared. |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | Getsova, Zhivka |
| Other Authors: | Christova, Iva; Lopes, Henrique |
| Subject: | SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being |
| Year: | 2025 |
| Country: | Portugal |
| Document type: | conference output |
| Access type: | open access |
| Associated institution: | Universidade Nova de Lisboa |
| Language: | English |
| Origin: | Repositório Institucional da UNL |
| Summary: | Background The healthcare sector relies on healthcare professionals (HCPs) to promote prevention and control. Their views on health hazards influence public perceptions. The study aims to explore the under-researched area of HCPs’ confidence in preparedness and response and the quality of information they received during the pandemic. Methods A convenience cohort of 1286 HCPs in Bulgaria and Portugal completed a survey. Using a Likert scale, participants assessed a set of competencies and needs related to their ability to support communication during crises. Participants were asked to select sources of information used for their personal needs and medical practices. Quantitative methods were used to analyze independent factors. Results Communication competency self-assessment shows HCPs feel confident about their skills to disseminate lifesaving advice (x ̅=4.12) but express doubts when selecting their sources of information (x ̅=3.60, where 5 indicates the highest level of knowledge). No significant differences were found between the two countries. There is an association between confidence and age as younger HCPs evaluated their skills with lower average score (x ̅21-30=3.98, x ̅31-40=4.16, x ̅41-50=4.18, x ̅51-60=4.21, x ̅60 + =3.98 p = 0.006). The analysis revealed official channels are predominantly used, but a considerable share of HCPs ranks social networks and informal exchange among their preferred sources of information (8.62% and 10.37% in Bulgaria and 8.18% and 10.28% in Portugal, respectively). For medical practice, Bulgarian HCPs relied mostly on scientific publications (40%), while their Portuguese colleagues primarily used the instructions from the Ministry of Health (62%). Conclusions Despite the great cultural differences between the two countries, both groups of HCPs self-evaluate their skills in communication at a high level. However, we identified major gaps in communication competencies, which remain far below the optimal levels for preparedness. Key messages • The relatively high share of HCPs relying on information from informal sources in both countries researched raises concerns about potential proliferation of misinformation through HCPs’ authority. • It is imperative that the skills of selecting information sources in the event of a health emergency and the ability of HCPs to use and relay them are trained and much better prepared. |
|---|