1887
Research Open Access
Like 0

Abstract

Background

During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, key persons who were formally or informally active in community organisations and networks, such as sports clubs or cultural, educational, day care and healthcare facilities, occupied a key position between governments and citizens. However, their experiences, the dilemmas they faced and the solutions they generated when implementing COVID-19 measures in their respective settings are understudied.

Aim

We aimed to understand how key persons in different community organisations and networks experienced and responded to the COVID-19 measures in the Netherlands.

Methods

Between October 2020 and December 2021, the Corona Behavioural Unit at the Dutch national public health institute, conducted qualitative research based on narratives derived from 65 in-depth interviews with 95 key persons from 32 organisations and networks in eight different sectors.

Results

Firstly, key persons enhanced adherence and supported the resilience and well-being of people involved in their settings. Secondly, adherence was negatively affected where COVID-19 measures conflicted with important organisational goals and values. Thirdly, small changes and ambiguities in COVID-19 policy had substantial consequences, depending on the context. Fourthly, problem-solving was achieved through trial-and-error, peer support, co-creation and transparent communication. Lastly, the COVID-19 pandemic and measures highlighted inequalities in access to resources.

Conclusion

Pandemic preparedness requires organisational and community preparedness and a multidisciplinary public health approach. Structural engagement of governments with key persons in community organisations and networks is key to enhance public trust and adherence to pandemic measures and contributes to health equity and the well-being of the people involved.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.42.2200242
2022-10-20
2022-12-10
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.42.2200242
Loading
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/eurosurveillance/27/42/eurosurv-27-42-4.html?itemId=/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.42.2200242&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Haug N, Geyrhofer L, Londei A, Dervic E, Desvars-Larrive A, Loreto V, et al. Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions. Nat Hum Beh. 2020; 4(12): 1303-1312. Available from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0?s=03
  2. Brauner JM, Mindermann S, Sharma M, Johnston D, Salvatier J, Gavenčiak T, et al. Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19. Science 2021; 371(6531). PMID: PMC7877495.
  3. Sanders JG, Spruijt P, van Dijk M, Elberse J, Lambooij MS, Kroese FM, et al. Understanding a national increase in COVID-19 vaccination intention, the Netherlands, November 2020-March 2021. Euro Surveill. 2021;26(36):2100792.  https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.36.2100792  PMID: 34505565 
  4. de Bruin M, Suk JE, Baggio M, Blomquist SE, Falcon M, Forjaz MJ, et al. Behavioural insights and the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. Euro Surveill. 2022;27(18):2100615.  https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.18.2100615  PMID: 35514309 
  5. Bavel JJV, Baicker K, Boggio PS, Capraro V, Cichocka A, Cikara M, et al. Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat Hum Behav. 2020;4(5):460-71.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z  PMID: 32355299 
  6. World Health Organization (WHO). Role of community engagement in situations of extensive community transmission of COVID-19 Interim guidance. Geneva: WHO; 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WPR-DSE-2020-016
  7. Michener L, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Alberti PM, Castaneda MJ, Castrucci BC, Harrison LM, et al. Engaging With Communities - Lessons (Re)Learned From COVID-19. Prev Chronic Dis. 2020;17(200250):E65. . Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2020/20_0250.htm https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd17.200250  PMID: 32678059 
  8. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-57.  https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042  PMID: 17872937 
  9. O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245-51.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388  PMID: 24979285 
  10. Mays N, Pope C. Qualitative research in health care. Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000;320(7226):50-2.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50  PMID: 10617534 
  11. Czarniawska B. Narratives in Social Science research. California: Sage Publications; 2004.
  12. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment of the Netherlands (RIVM). Basisdocument preventiegedrag en welzijn. [Basic document prevention behaviour and well-being.] Bilthoven: RIVM; 2020. Dutch. Available from: https://www.rivm.nl/documenten/basisdocument-preventiegedrag-welzijn
  13. Kok G, Gottlieb NH, Peters GJY, Mullen PD, Parcel GS, Ruiter RA, et al. A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an Intervention Mapping approach. Health Psychol Rev. 2016;10(3):297-312.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2015.1077155  PMID: 26262912 
  14. Patton MQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3th ed. California: Sage publications; 2002.
  15. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment of the Netherlands (RIVM) Voorbeelden uit de praktijk. [Practical examples]. Bilthoven: RIVM. [Accessed: 4 Oct 2022]. Dutch. Available from: https://www.rivm.nl/gedragsonderzoek/voorbeelden-uit-de-praktijk
  16. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77-101.  https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 
  17. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment of the Netherlands (RIVM). Impact van COVID-19 maatregelen op stakeholders in organisaties en netwerken: vijf lessen uit de praktijk. [Impact of COVID-19 measures on stakeholders in organizations and networks: five lessons from practice]. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2021. Dutch. Available from: https://www.rivm.nl/documenten/impact-van-covid-19-maatregelen-op-stakeholders-in-organisaties-en-netwerken-vijf-lessen
  18. Jewett RL, Mah SM, Howell N, Larsen MM. Social Cohesion and Community Resilience During COVID-19 and Pandemics: A Rapid Scoping Review to Inform the United Nations Research Roadmap for COVID-19 Recovery. Int J Health Serv. 2021;51(3):325-36.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0020731421997092  PMID: 33827308 
  19. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment of the Netherlands (RIVM). Covid-19 dataset. Bilthoven: RIVM. [Accessed: 1 Aug 2022]. Available from: https://data.rivm.nl/covid-19/COVID-19_ziekenhuisopnames.csv
  20. Hale T, Angrist N, Goldszmidt R, Kira B, Petherick A, Phillips T, et al. A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker). Nat Hum Behav. 2021;5(4):529-38.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8  PMID: 33686204 
  21. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment of the Netherlands (RIVM). Tijdlijn coronamaatregelen 2020-2022. [Timeline of corona measures 0-2022]. Bilthoven: RIVM. 21 Jun 2022. Dutch. Available from: https://www.rivm.nl/gedragsonderzoek/tijdlijn-maatregelen-covid PMID: 202 
/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.42.2200242
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary data

Submit comment
Close
Comment moderation successfully completed
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error