Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T11:05:07.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Qualitative Study of Homeowners' Emergency Preparedness: Experiences, Perceptions, and Practices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Shane T. Diekman ,
Sean P. Kearney ,
Mary E. O'Neil  and
Karin A. Mack
Shane T. Diekman*
Affiliation:
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Sean P. Kearney
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut, USA
Mary E. O'Neil
Affiliation:
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Karin A. Mack
Affiliation:
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
*
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 4770 Buford Hwy, NE, MS K-63 Atlanta, GA 30341 USA E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Considerable morbidity, mortality, and costs are associated with household emergency situations involving natural hazards and fires. Many households are poorly prepared for such emergency situations, and little is known about the psychosocial aspects of household emergency preparedness.

Problem:

The aim of this study is to promote a better understanding of homeowners' experiences and perceptions regarding household emergency situations and related preparedness practices.

Methods:

A brief survey was administered and three focus group sessions were conducted with homeowners (n = 16) from two metro Atlanta homeowners'associations.The survey inquired about basic demographic information, personal experience with a natural hazard or fire, and awareness of preparedness recommendations. The focus group discussions centered on household emergency preparedness perceptions and practices.

Results:

Participants defined household emergency preparedness as being able to survive with basic supplies (e.g., water, flashlights) for 48 hours or longer. While most participants had sufficient knowledge of how to prepare for household emergency situations, many did not feel fully prepared or had not completed some common preparedness measures. Concern about protecting family members and personal experience with emergency situations were identified as strong motivations for preparing the household for future emergencies.

Conclusions:

The focus group findings indicate that most participants have prepared for household emergency situations by discussing the dangers with family members, stockpiling resources, and taking a CPR or first-aid class. However, to the extent that behavior is influenced, there is a gap between maintaining preparedness levels and internalizing preparedness recommendations. Prevention efforts in Georgia should focus on closing that gap.

Keywords

emergency preparednessevacuationevaluationfirefocus groupshomeownershurricanesnatural disastersqualitativereadiness
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 22 , Issue 6 , December 2007 , pp. 494 - 501
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Mileti, DS: Disasters by design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press, 1999.Google Scholar
2.Bailey, MA, Glover, R, Huan, Y: Epidemiologic assessment of the impact of four hurricanes–Florida, 2004. MMWR 2005;54(28):693–697.Google Scholar
3.Knabb, RD, Rhome, JR, Brown, DP: Tropical cyclone report: Hurricane Katrina, 23–30 August 2005. Miami, FL: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service, National Hurricane Center; December 20, 2005 [Updated 10 August 2006]. Available at http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL122005_Katrina.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2006.Google Scholar
4.Infoplease: US Hurricanes. 2005 Pearson Education, publishing as Infoplease. Available at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001443.html. Accessed 23 May 2006.Google Scholar
5.Karter, MJ: Fire loss in the United States during 2005–full report. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, Fire Analysis and Research Division. Available at: http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/OS.fireloss.pdf. Accessed 01 February 2007.Google Scholar
6.Mileti, DS, Peek, LA: Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002.Google Scholar
7.American Red Cross: Get prepared. Available at http://www.redcross.org/services/prepare/0,1082,0_77_,00.html. Accessed 06 February 2007.Google Scholar
8.American Red Cross: Preparedness poll. Available at http://www.redcross.org/press-release/0,1077,0_314_5398,00.html. Accessed 26 May 2006.Google Scholar
9.Norris, F: Epidemiology of trauma: Frequency and impact of different potentially traumatic events on different demographic groups. J Consult Clin Psychol 1992;60:409–418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Harris Interactive: Fire prevention week survey–Fall 2004. Conducted for the National Fire Protection Association. Available at http://www.nfpa.org/assets/images/Public%20Education/FPWsurvey.pdf. Accessed 16 May 2006.Google Scholar
11.Edwards, ML: Social location and self-protective behavior: Implications for earthquake preparedness. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 1993;11(3):293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Mason-Dixon Polling and Research, Inc: Costal state residents fail hurricane safety test. Available at http://hurricanesafety.org/mediakit/masonDixon_poll.pdf. Accessed 16 April 2006.Google Scholar
13.Hochbaum, GM: Public Participation in Medical Screening Programs: A Sociopsychological Study. PHS publication no. 572. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1958.Google Scholar
14.Janz, NK, Champion, VL, Strecher, VJ: The Health Belief Model. In: K, Glanz, B, Rimer, F, Lewis (eds): Health Behavior and Health Education. 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002, pp 45–66.Google Scholar
15.Joffe, H, Yardley, L: Content and Thematic Analysis. In: D, Marks, L, Yardley (eds): Research Methods in Clinical and Health Psychology. London: Sage Publications, 2003, pp 56–68.Google Scholar
16.Glanz, K, Rimer, BK, Lewis, FM (eds): Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.Google Scholar
17.American Red Cross: Emergency food and water supplies. Available at http://www.redcross.org/preparedness/cdc_english/foodwater-1.asp. Accessed 16 February 2007.Google Scholar
18.Georgia Emergency Management Agency: Available at http://gema.georgia.gov/01/home/0,2197,868212,00.html. Accessed 15 May 2006.Google Scholar
19.Childers, W, Alperin, M, Miner, KR: Emergency preparedness in Georgia: An assessment of public health training needs. American Journal of Health Education 2005;36(5):287–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Wallack, L, Woodruff, K, Dorfman, L, Diaz, I: News for a Change: An Advocates Guide to Working with the Media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1999.Google Scholar
21.Gore, TD, Bracken, CC: Testing the theoretical design of a health risk message: Re-examining the major tenets of the extended parallel process model. Health Educ Behav 2005;32(1):27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Witte, K: Putting the fear back into fear appeal: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs 1992;59:329–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Witte, K: Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communication Monographs 1994;61:113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Witte, K, Allen, M: A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Educ Behav 2000;27:591–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.American Red Cross: Welcome to preparedness today.Available at http://www.redcross.org/preparedness/cdc_english/home.asp. Accessed 16 February 2007.Google Scholar
26.Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Are you ready? Available at http://www.fema.gov/areyouready/emergency_planning.shtm. Accessed 05 February 2007.Google Scholar
27.Blanchard-Boehm, RD: Understanding public response to increased risk from natural hazards: Application of the hazards risk communication framework. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 1998;16(8):247–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar