[Doctors in the public debate]. / Arts in het publieke debat.

Conversation about health(care) takes place online and offline. By making conscious choices about public and media appearances, doctors can contribute to good health(care) based on the confidence people have 'in the white coat'. Doctors can offer people guidance if they know how to respond to the questions people have about their health or that of their loved ones. Because great weight is attached to the words of doctors, unintentional damage is lurking in the event of a media appearance, if there is a lack of preparation. In addition to media training, four questions can be helpful in preparing for media appearances: 1) What social dynamics do you observe or expect? 2) Why do you want to get involved in a societal debate via the media? 3) What talents and expertise do you bring into the discussions? And 4) which aspects do you maybe not wish to discuss in public?

[Vulnerable groups for COVID-19 control measures]. / COVID-19: over welke mensen maken we ons extra zorgen?

The COVID-19 outbreak and its control measures affect the life, livelihood and way of life of many. Vulnerable groups may require different information, practical, emotional and financial support, depending on their specific vulnerabilities. Early reports for the Dutch government on the impacts of COVID-19 control measures were used for drafting a preliminary overview of vulnerable groups and their vulnerabilities. The overview may serve as first step towards a scoping review and be of use in the professional discussion for targeting and finetuning the support to the groups most in need.

Collaborative emergency preparedness and response to cross-institutional outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms: a scenario-based approach in two regions of the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The likelihood of large-scale outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) is growing. MDRO outbreaks can affect a wide range of healthcare institutions. Control of such outbreaks requires structured collaboration between professionals from all involved healthcare institutions, but guidelines for cross-institutional procedures are, however, often missing. Literature indicates that such multi-actor collaboration is most promising when effective network brokers are present, and when the collaborative actors have clarity about the different roles and responsibilities in the outbreak response network, including collaborative structures and coordination roles. Studying these factors in an imaginary MDRO outbreak scenario, we gained insights into the expectations that health professionals in the Netherlands have in regard to the procedures required to best respond to any future cross-institutional MDRO outbreaks. METHODS: For exploration purpose, a focus group discussion with ten healthcare professionals was held. Subsequently, an online-survey was conducted among 56 healthcare professionals in two Dutch regions. The survey data was analysed using social network analyses (clique analysis and centrality analysis), which provided insights into the collaborative structures and potential brokers in the outbreak response networks. Additionally, respondents were asked which healthcare institutions and which professions they would prefer as coordinating actors in the collaborative network. RESULTS: Our results show a relatively high level of perceived clarity about the roles and responsibilities that healthcare professionals have during a joint outbreak response. The regional outbreak response networks which were studied appeared inclusive and integrated, with many overlapping groups of fully-connected healthcare actors. Social network analyses resulted in the identification of several central actors from different healthcare institutions with the potential to take on a brokerage role in the collaboration. Actors in the outbreak response networks also showed to prefer several healthcare professionals to take on the coordination roles. CONCLUSION: Expected collaborative structures during an imaginary regional MDRO outbreak response are relatively dense and integrated. In regard to the coordination of an MDRO outbreak response, based on both the network analysis results and the preferred coordination roles, our findings support a governance structure with several healthcare institutions involved in responding to future cross-institutional MDRO outbreaks.

Rapid Assessment of Stakeholder Concerns about Public Health. An Introduction to a Fast and Inexpensive Approach Applied on Health Concerns about Intensive Animal Production Systems.

To effectively manage environmental health risks, stakeholders often need to act collectively. Stakeholders vary in their desire to act due to many factors, such as knowledge, risk perception, interests, and worldviews. Understanding their perceptions of the issues at stake is crucial to support the risk governance process. Even though concern assessment is a pivotal element of risk governance, few tools for rapid assessment are reported in the literature. We tested a rapid and relatively cheap approach, taking the Dutch debate on Intensive Animal Production Systems (IAPS) and health as an example. Dutch policy-oriented publications on IAPS and health and ten semi-structured in-depth interviews with a variety of stakeholders were analyzed to identify stakeholders and concerns involved in the Dutch debate about IAPS and health. Concerns were mapped and a stakeholder network was derived. Three classes of concerns were recognized in the discussions about IAPS and health: concerns related to health risks, concerns regarding the activity causing the risks (IAPS), and concerns about the process to control the risks. The notions of 'trust' and 'scientific uncertainty' appeared as important themes in the discussions. Argumentation based on concerns directly related to health risks, the activity causing the risk (IAPS), and its risk management can easily become muddled up in a societal debate, limiting the development of effective action perspectives. Acknowledging these multiple stakeholder concerns can clarify the positions taken by stakeholders and allow for more and other action perspectives to develop.

Context analysis for epidemic control in the Netherlands.

When epidemics occur, experts advise the Ministries on effective control measures. There is uncertainty in the translation of epidemiological evidence into effective outbreak management interventions, due to contradicatory problem perspectives, diverse interests and time pressure. Several models have been developed that aim to integrate societal context information in risk assessment to improve the feasibility and the implementation of adviced measures. The current study explored the views of relevant public officials on this issue using the Rapid Risk Assessment of Acute Public Health Events model of the World Health Organization. Eighteen public officials involved in infectious disease risk assessment and policy making in the Netherlands participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews. Their experiences, expectations and expert opinions on the use of societal context information for infectious disease outbreak control were explored. Most interviewees consider information on societal context necessary for infectious disease risk management. However, different perspectives exist on which information is relevant, and how, when, why and by whom it should be obtained. We conclude that outbreak control could benefit from systematically gathered information on the societal context. This requires identifying which information is beneficial and selecting or designing methods to obtain it. Explicit stakeholder assessment seems a first step.

Travel-related MERS-CoV cases: an assessment of exposures and risk factors in a group of Dutch travellers returning from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, May 2014.

BACKGROUND: In May 2014, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection, with closely related viral genomes, was diagnosed in two Dutch residents, returning from a pilgrimage to Medina and Mecca, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). These patients travelled with a group of 29 other Dutch travellers. We conducted an epidemiological assessment of the travel group to identify likely source(s) of infection and presence of potential risk factors. METHODS: All travellers, including the two cases, completed a questionnaire focussing on potential human, animal and food exposures to MERS-CoV. The questionnaire was modified from the WHO MERS-CoV questionnaire, taking into account the specific route and activities of the travel group. RESULTS: Twelve non-cases drank unpasteurized camel milk and had contact with camels. Most travellers, including one of the two patients (Case 1), visited local markets, where six of them consumed fruits. Two travellers, including Case 1, were exposed to coughing patients when visiting a hospital in Medina. Four travellers, including Case 1, visited two hospitals in Mecca. All travellers had been in contact with Case 1 while he was sick, with initially non-respiratory complaints. The cases were found to be older than the other travellers and both had co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: This epidemiological study revealed the complexity of MERS-CoV outbreak investigations with multiple potential exposures to MERS-CoV reported such as healthcare visits, camel exposure, and exposure to untreated food products. Exposure to MERS-CoV during a hospital visit is considered a likely source of infection for Case 1 but not for Case 2. For Case 2, the most likely source could not be determined. Exposure to MERS-CoV via direct contact with animals or dairy products seems unlikely for the two Dutch cases. Furthermore, exposure to a common but still unidentified source cannot be ruled out. More comprehensive research into sources of infection in the Arabian Peninsula is needed to strengthen and specify the prevention of MERS-CoV infections.

Two cases of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the Netherlands without recent travel to a malaria-endemic country.

Recently, two patients of African origin were given a diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria without recent travel to a malaria-endemic country. This observation highlights the importance for clinicians to consider tropical malaria in patients with fever. Possible transmission routes of P. falciparum to these patients will be discussed. From a public health perspective, international collaboration is crucial when potential cases of European autochthonous P. falciparum malaria in Europe re considered.

Implementation of a Q fever vaccination program for high-risk patients in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Between 2007 and 2011 the Netherlands was faced with an unprecedented Q fever outbreak with more than 4000 people affected. Dairy goats were considered the main source of infection. In addition to taking veterinary measures, the Dutch government offered an unlicensed vaccine against the causative bacterium Coxiella burnetii to patient groups at high-risk of Q fever complications. This article describes the complexity of the vaccination program for Q fever in 2010-2011. METHODS: High-risk patients were selected and referred mainly by their general practitioner to a publicly funded centralized screening and vaccination program. In addition, cardiovascular specialists and the public were informed. Patients were screened for previous infection with C. burnetii by serology and skin-tests. Patients who tested positive were excluded from vaccination. RESULTS: Of the 2741 referred high-risk patients (1669 male, 1957 from the high-risk area), 955 were excluded because vaccination was considered unnecessary or the distance to the vaccination clinic too far. 388 (22% of those screened) were excluded because of a positive skin-test or serology. 1368 patients (77% of those screened) were vaccinated between January and June 2011. Two-thirds of the vaccinees reported an adverse event. 89 patients (6.6%) reported serious adverse events. In just one patient, with an injection site reaction, a possible causal relationship was considered. CONCLUSION: This Q fever vaccination program posed challenges to the Dutch Health Care system. Creating clarity on the roles and responsibilities of those involved precluded timely vaccination. Targeting the high-risk population through GPs was challenging but appeared to be efficient. The vaccination was considered to be safe and compliance of the screened patients was high.