Cargando…

Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada

BACKGROUND: During the 2009 H1N1 immunization campaign, electronic and hybrid (comprising both electronic and paper components) systems were employed to collect client-level vaccination data in clinics across Canada. Because different systems were used across the country, the 2009 immunization campa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Foisy, Julie, Quach, Susan, Heidebrecht, Christine L, Pereira, Jennifer A, Quan, Sherman D, Guay, Maryse, Bettinger, Julie A, Deeks, Shelley L, Brien, Stephanie, Kwong, Jeffrey C
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3024979/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21831331
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-796
_version_ 1782196850567151616
author Foisy, Julie
Quach, Susan
Heidebrecht, Christine L
Pereira, Jennifer A
Quan, Sherman D
Guay, Maryse
Bettinger, Julie A
Deeks, Shelley L
Brien, Stephanie
Kwong, Jeffrey C
author_facet Foisy, Julie
Quach, Susan
Heidebrecht, Christine L
Pereira, Jennifer A
Quan, Sherman D
Guay, Maryse
Bettinger, Julie A
Deeks, Shelley L
Brien, Stephanie
Kwong, Jeffrey C
author_sort Foisy, Julie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During the 2009 H1N1 immunization campaign, electronic and hybrid (comprising both electronic and paper components) systems were employed to collect client-level vaccination data in clinics across Canada. Because different systems were used across the country, the 2009 immunization campaign offered an opportunity to study the usability of the various data collection methods. METHODS: A convenience sample of clinic staff working in public health agencies and hospitals in 9 provinces/territories across Canada completed a questionnaire in which they indicated their level of agreement with seven statements regarding the usability of the data collection system employed at their vaccination clinic. Questions included overall ease of use, effectiveness of the method utilized, efficiency at completing tasks, comfort using the method, ability to recover from mistakes, ease of learning the method and overall satisfaction with the method. A 5-point Likert-type scale was used to measure responses. RESULTS: Most respondents (96%) were employed in sites run by public health. Respondents included 186 nurses and 114 administrative staff, among whom 90% and 47%, respectively, used a paper-based method for data collection. Approximately half the respondents had a year or less of experience with immunization-related tasks during seasonal influenza campaigns. Over 90% of all frontline staff found their data collection method easy to use, perceived it to be effective in helping them complete their tasks, felt quick and comfortable using the method, and found the method easy to learn, regardless of whether a hybrid or electronic system was used. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that there may be a greater willingness of frontline immunization staff to adapt to new technologies than previously perceived by decision-makers. The public health community should recognize that usability may not be a barrier to implementing electronic methods for collecting individual-level immunization data.
format Text
id pubmed-3024979
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30249792011-01-22 Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada Foisy, Julie Quach, Susan Heidebrecht, Christine L Pereira, Jennifer A Quan, Sherman D Guay, Maryse Bettinger, Julie A Deeks, Shelley L Brien, Stephanie Kwong, Jeffrey C BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: During the 2009 H1N1 immunization campaign, electronic and hybrid (comprising both electronic and paper components) systems were employed to collect client-level vaccination data in clinics across Canada. Because different systems were used across the country, the 2009 immunization campaign offered an opportunity to study the usability of the various data collection methods. METHODS: A convenience sample of clinic staff working in public health agencies and hospitals in 9 provinces/territories across Canada completed a questionnaire in which they indicated their level of agreement with seven statements regarding the usability of the data collection system employed at their vaccination clinic. Questions included overall ease of use, effectiveness of the method utilized, efficiency at completing tasks, comfort using the method, ability to recover from mistakes, ease of learning the method and overall satisfaction with the method. A 5-point Likert-type scale was used to measure responses. RESULTS: Most respondents (96%) were employed in sites run by public health. Respondents included 186 nurses and 114 administrative staff, among whom 90% and 47%, respectively, used a paper-based method for data collection. Approximately half the respondents had a year or less of experience with immunization-related tasks during seasonal influenza campaigns. Over 90% of all frontline staff found their data collection method easy to use, perceived it to be effective in helping them complete their tasks, felt quick and comfortable using the method, and found the method easy to learn, regardless of whether a hybrid or electronic system was used. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that there may be a greater willingness of frontline immunization staff to adapt to new technologies than previously perceived by decision-makers. The public health community should recognize that usability may not be a barrier to implementing electronic methods for collecting individual-level immunization data. BioMed Central 2010-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3024979/ /pubmed/21831331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-796 Text en Copyright ©2010 Foisy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (<url>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0</url>), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Foisy, Julie
Quach, Susan
Heidebrecht, Christine L
Pereira, Jennifer A
Quan, Sherman D
Guay, Maryse
Bettinger, Julie A
Deeks, Shelley L
Brien, Stephanie
Kwong, Jeffrey C
Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada
title Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada
title_full Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada
title_fullStr Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada
title_full_unstemmed Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada
title_short Perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 A H1N1 influenza immunization campaign in Canada
title_sort perceptions of frontline staff regarding data collection methodologies used during the 2009 a h1n1 influenza immunization campaign in canada
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3024979/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21831331
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-796
work_keys_str_mv AT foisyjulie perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT quachsusan perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT heidebrechtchristinel perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT pereirajennifera perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT quanshermand perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT guaymaryse perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT bettingerjuliea perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT deeksshelleyl perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT brienstephanie perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada
AT kwongjeffreyc perceptionsoffrontlinestaffregardingdatacollectionmethodologiesusedduringthe2009ah1n1influenzaimmunizationcampaignincanada