Melissa A. Higdon

Public Health Systems Research in Emergency Preparedness A Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND Despite the acknowledged promise of developing a public health systems research (PHSR) agenda for emergency preparedness, there has been no systematic review of the literature in this area. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review in order to identify and characterize the PHSR literature produced in the U.S. in the past 11 years in the field of public health emergency preparedness. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Articles were searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE, as well as in the gray literature. Two independent reviewers classified the articles according to study design and IOM public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) research goal areas. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS From January 1, 1997, through December 31, 2008, there were 547 articles that met the inclusion criteria that were published. It was possible to classify 314 (57%) articles into at least one of the four IOM PHEP research goal areas. Of these, 61 (11%) addressed Research Area 1 (usefulness of training); 39 (7%) addressed Research Area 2 (communications in preparedness and response); 193 (35%) addressed Research Area 3 (sustainable preparedness and response systems); and 39 (7%) addressed Research Area 4 (criteria and metrics to measure effectiveness and efficiency). Twenty-one studies (4%) could be classified into more than one category. The majority of the articles (81%), including commentaries/reviews and case studies, were based on qualitative analysis. Commentaries/review articles were the most common study types (62%). CONCLUSIONS Since 2001, the PHSR literature on PHEP issues has grown at about 33% per year. However, most studies lack a rigorous design, raising questions about the validity of the results.

Using Learning Collaboratives to Improve Public Health Emergency Preparedness Systems

The U.S. National Health Security Strategy calls for the development and wide-spread implementation of quality improvement (QI) tools in public health emergency preparedness (PHEP), including the development of “learning collaboratives,” a structured way for organizations with common interests to close the gap between potential and practice by learning from each other. To test this approach, we developed and assessed separate learning collaboratives focused on PHEP emergency communications and on the use of Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) volunteers. Although participants carried out improvement projects that they felt were useful, each collaborative struggled to identify a common theme, participation was limited, and leadership buy-in was not strong. This suggests that the learning collaborative model may not be appropriate in this context. Because some of the factors that limited their success are inherent (the lack of an established evidence base and agreed upon outcome and performance measures and the difficulty of carrying out rapid Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles and measuring the results), this suggests that the learning collaborative model may not be appropriate in this context.