Suchergebnisse

Despite available knowledge on appropriate psychosocial support for people confronted with death, loss, and severe stress in the context of major crises and disasters, it is crucial to understand what people affected expect from government officials and public leaders in the aftermath of an extreme event. Eight interviews with affected adult residents were conducted to explore their expectations and experiences in relation to government. This was done against the background of Park's () model on meaning making. Findings revealed that interviewees expected the government to help them in a fair, compassionate, equal, and reliable manner. They also expected support in fulfilling event‐related practical needs, and assumed that the government would use its capacity to align network partners and break down bureaucratic barriers. The affected individuals' global beliefs and situational meaning may differ from the perceptions of the public leader who provides support.

Background: During times of crisis, mayors may play an important role as public leaders and providers of social support to affected residents. However, empirical studies have not yet been conducted among the involved mayors about the support they provide and the factors associated with it. Objective: The aim is to examine the support the mayors provided to the affected residents during crises and to test the possible determinants of this support. Method: A web-based survey developed for this study, including a modified version of the Social Support Survey, was filled by 266 Dutch mayors (response = 66.5%), of whom 231 were involved in at least one crisis in their community in the past five years. We examined the association between the perceived support provided by the mayors and their years of experience, demographics, municipality size, and assessment of the collective impact of the crisis and their own political responsibility. Moreover, we tested the probability of mayoral home visits based on the same factors as well as loss of life. Results: All of the involved Dutch mayors reported providing support, which varied from lending a listening ear to discussing public ceremonies and remembrances with the affected and their families. The mayors' age, sex, municipality size, and years of experience were not significantly related to the perceived social support provision or willingness to reach out to affected citizens. Apart from fatalities linked to the crisis, none of the factors tested had a significant effect on the probability of mayors making home visits. Conclusion: Mayors are likely to report positively on how they provided social support to residents during crises regardless of the factors considered. Mayors are most likely to conduct home visits in situations where one or more citizens died. Further validation and replication of the social support measurement instrument is needed.

Epidemiological research has documented the serious health issues that can affect the victims of disasters and major crises. Yet, the psychosocial dimension of crisis has received little attention in crisis management literature. This paper integrates psychosocial principles with a model of strategic crisis management. The resulting model of psychosocial crisis management (PCM) describes how the tasks of strategic crisis managers can be guided by psychosocial support principles. This PCM‐model helps public leaders, at society and local community level, to better understand typical psychosocial dynamics and obstacles as the crisis life cycle evolves. Although crisis management insights and psychosocial support principles stem from different disciplines and research traditions, integrating them helps to reduce foreseeable problems in the response and recovery phases.

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 crashed in the Ukraine on 17 July 2014 with 193 Dutch passengers on board. The present study assessed which MH17‐related activities (or absence of certain activities) of 54 mayors from the Netherlands were mentioned in (social) media and if and how they were evaluated. Analyses of newspaper articles and social media showed that public 'meaning making' and 'remembering' by mayors can be considered as a table stake or conditio sine qua non. Mayors are expected to speak at memorials and attend community activities. Strong appreciation was however retrieved from victims' families whenever mayors visited them with a listening ear in the privacy of their homes, demonstrating the role mayors can fulfil as mourners‐in‐chief in local communities.

The aim of this article is to provide a systematic review of peer‐reviewed literature on leadership tasks and effectiveness of mayors and governors during drastic collective events. A total of 34 peer‐reviewed articles met our criteria. They were analysed using the theoretical framework by Boin on leadership tasks, i.e., sense making, decision making, meaning making, terminating, and learning. Studies ranged from minor incidents like local riots, to the events of 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina. The material turned out to be dominated by Western and American studies. Because of limitations in the empirical and knowledge base of the studies, it is difficult to draw general conclusions on what is supposed to be effective leadership by mayors and/or governors in these circumstances.

Disasters can have an enormous impact on the health and well-being of those affected. Internationally, governments and service providers are often challenged to address complex psychosocial problems. Ideally, the potentially broad range of support activities include a coherent, high-quality mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programme. We present a theory-driven quantitative analysis of the quality of 40 MHPSS programmes, mostly implemented in European disaster settings. The objective is to measure quality domains recognized as relevant in the literature and to empirically test associations. During the EU project "Operationalizing Psychosocial Support in Crisis" (OPSIC) an evaluation survey was designed and developed for this purpose and completed by 40 MHPSS programme coordinators involved in different mass emergencies and disasters. We analysed the survey data in two steps. Firstly, we used the data to operationalize quality domains of a MHPSS programme, tested constructs and assessed their internal consistency reliability. A total of 26 out of 44 survey items clustered into three of the four domains identified within the theoretical framework: "planning and delivery system" (Cronbach's alpha 0.82); "general evaluation criteria" (Cronbach's alpha 0.82); and "essential psychosocial principles" (Cronbach's alpha 0.75). "Measures and interventions applied", theoretically a potential fourth domain, could not be confirmed to empirically cluster together. Secondly, several models with associations between domains and measures and interventions were tested and compared. The model with the best fit suggests that in MHPSS programmes with a higher planning and delivery systems score, a larger number of measures and interventions from evidence-informed guidelines are applied. In such programmes, coordinators are more positive about general evaluation criteria and the realization of essential psychosocial principles. Moreover, the analyses showed that some measures and interventions are more likely to be applied in programmes with more evolved planning and delivery systems, yet for most measures and interventions the likelihood of being applied is not linked to planning and delivery system status, nor to coordinator perceptions concerning psychosocial principles and evaluation criteria. Further research is necessary to validate and expand the findings and to learn more about success factors and obstacles for MHPSS programme implementation.

Disasters can have an enormous impact on the health and well-being of those affected. Internationally, governments and service providers are often challenged to address complex psychosocial problems. Ideally, the potentially broad range of support activities include a coherent, high-quality mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programme. We present a theory-driven quantitative analysis of the quality of 40 MHPSS programmes, mostly implemented in European disaster settings. The objective is to measure quality domains recognized as relevant in the literature and to empirically test associations. During the EU project "Operationalizing Psychosocial Support in Crisis" (OPSIC) an evaluation survey was designed and developed for this purpose and completed by 40 MHPSS programme coordinators involved in different mass emergencies and disasters. We analysed the survey data in two steps. Firstly, we used the data to operationalize quality domains of a MHPSS programme, tested constructs and assessed their internal consistency reliability. A total of 26 out of 44 survey items clustered into three of the four domains identified within the theoretical framework: "planning and delivery system" (Cronbach's alpha 0.82); "general evaluation criteria" (Cronbach's alpha 0.82); and "essential psychosocial principles" (Cronbach's alpha 0.75). "Measures and interventions applied", theoretically a potential fourth domain, could not be confirmed to empirically cluster together. Secondly, several models with associations between domains and measures and interventions were tested and compared. The model with the best fit suggests that in MHPSS programmes with a higher planning and delivery systems score, a larger number of measures and interventions from evidence-informed guidelines are applied. In such programmes, coordinators are more positive about general evaluation criteria and the realization of essential psychosocial principles. Moreover, the analyses showed that some measures and interventions are more likely to be applied in programmes with more evolved planning and delivery systems, yet for most measures and interventions the likelihood of being applied is not linked to planning and delivery system status, nor to coordinator perceptions concerning psychosocial principles and evaluation criteria. Further research is necessary to validate and expand the findings and to learn more about success factors and obstacles for MHPSS programme implementation.

In the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become clear that primary healthcare systems play a critical role in clinical care, such as patient screening, triage, physical and psychological support and also in promoting good community advice and awareness in coordination with secondary healthcare and preventive care. Because of the role of social and environmental factors in COVID-19 transmission and burden of disease, it is essential to ensure that there is adequate coordination of population-based health services and public health interventions. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the primary and community healthcare (P&CHC) system's weaknesses worldwide. In many instances, P&CHC played only a minor role, the emphasis being on hospital and intensive care beds. This was compounded by political failures, in supporting local community resilience. Placing community building, social cohesion and resilience at the forefront of dealing with the COVID-19 crisis can help align solutions that provide a vision of 'planetary health'. This can be achieved by involving local well-being and participation in the face of any pervasive health and environmental crisis, including other epidemics and large-scale ecological crises. This paper proposes that P&CHC should take on two critical roles: first, to support local problem-solving efforts and to serve as a partner in innovative approaches to safeguarding community well-being; and second, to understand the local environment and health risks in the context of the global health perspective. We see this as an opportunity of immediate value and broad consequence beyond the control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become clear that primary healthcare systems play a critical role in clinical care, such as patient screening, triage, physical and psychological support and also in promoting good community advice and awareness in coordination with secondary healthcare and preventive care. Because of the role of social and environmental factors in COVID-19 transmission and burden of disease, it is essential to ensure that there is adequate coordination of population-based health services and public health interventions. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the primary and community healthcare (P&CHC) system's weaknesses worldwide. In many instances, P&CHC played only a minor role, the emphasis being on hospital and intensive care beds. This was compounded by political failures, in supporting local community resilience. Placing community building, social cohesion and resilience at the forefront of dealing with the COVID-19 crisis can help align solutions that provide a vision of 'planetary health'. This can be achieved by involving local well-being and participation in the face of any pervasive health and environmental crisis, including other epidemics and large-scale ecological crises. This paper proposes that P&CHC should take on two critical roles: first, to support local problem-solving efforts and to serve as a partner in innovative approaches to safeguarding community well-being; and second, to understand the local environment and health risks in the context of the global health perspective. We see this as an opportunity of immediate value and broad consequence beyond the control of the COVID-19 pandemic.