medigraphic.com
Colegio de Medicina Interna de México.

2009, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Med Int Mex 2009; 25 (6)

Percepción social y actitudes de los trabajadores del Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía ante la alerta epidemiológica de la influenza humana A H1N1 en México durante el 2009

Velásquez PL, Contreras CGA, Salazar NRG, Chacón SJ

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 450-453
PDF size: 234.00 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: influenza viruses are significant human respiratory pathogens that cause an acute respiratory disease that can show up in a seasonal, epidemic or pandemic way. In April 2009, the first human cases of A H1N1 took place in Mexico City, which caused an epidemic that originated a sanitary alert.
Objective: Identify the perception and attitudes of the workers of a health institution facing the epidemic in Mexico.
Material and Methods: A survey was carried out amongst workers of the Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía of Mexico City, to evaluate their perception and attitudes about the measures adopted in the country and the institution.
Results: The percentage of fear and concern among the workers of the institute were as high as 66%, more than 70% feared the infection of some relatives or friends; nevertheless, the participation and the execution of the preventive measures implemented by the sanitary authorities of Mexico and for the institute were mostly adopted.
Conclusion: The workers are aware of the importance of continuing carrying out measures of prevention and hygiene mainly, nevertheless, it is necessary that the authorities of each institution verify and continue sensitizing their workers so that this protection element doesn’t get lost and strengthen, to avoid the transmission and to be better prepared before a turnaround, or in the case of a new and potentially catastrophic event.


REFERENCES

  1. Kuri MP. La pandemia de influenza: posibles escenarios en México. Gac Méd Mex 2008;144:285-290.

  2. Hattwick MA, O’Brien RJ, Hoke ChH, Dowdle WR. La influenza pandémica y el virus de influenza porcina. Bulletin of the Pan American Health Organization, 1976; Vol X. No.4.

  3. Jordan EO. Epidemic influenza of 1918. JAMA 89:599.

  4. Taubenberger JK. Morens DM. 1918 influenza: the mother of all pandemics. Emerg Infect Dis 206;12:15-22.

  5. Sharrar RG. National influenza experience in the USA, 18:968-1969. Bull WHO 1969;41:361-6.

  6. Kilbourne ED. Influenza pandemics of the 20th Century. Energ Infect Dis 2006; 12:9-14.

  7. Kuri MP, Betancourt CM, Velázquez MO, Álvarez LC, Tapia CR. Pandemia de influenza: la respuesta de México. Salud Pública Mex 2006;48:72-9.

  8. Paget WJ. Aguilera JF. Influenza pandemic planing in Europe. Euro Survell 2001;6:136-40.

  9. Secretaría de Salud. Plan Nacional de Preparación y Respuesta ante una pandemia de Influenza. Ciudad de México: Secretaría de Salud, 2005.

  10. Organización Mundial de la Salud. WHO. Preparación para una pandemia de influenza. Ginebra: Organización Mundial de la Salud, 2005.

  11. Wong CH R, Santos PJ. El brote de Influenza A (H1N1) del 2009. Gaceta Fac Med. 2009; Mayo:6-7.

  12. Taylor MR, Agho KE, Stevens GJ, Beverly R. Factors influencing psychological distress during a disease epidemic: data from Australia’s first outbreak of equine influenza. BMC Public Health 2008;8:347-59.

  13. Draper H, Wilson S, Ives J, et al. Healthcare workers’ attitudes toward working during pandemic influenza: A multi method study. BMC Public Health 2008;8:192-8.

  14. Bohm G. Emotional reactions to environmental risks: consequentialism versus ethical evaluation. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2003;32:199-212.

  15. Shaw KA, Chilcott A, Hansen E, Winzenberg T. The GPs response to pandemic influenza: a qualitative study. Family Practice 2006; April:267-72.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com