Good communications by emergency services during incidents that involve mass decontamination, such as chemical spills, would speed up the process and save lives. That is according to a researcher at Sussex University.
Holly Carter, a PhD student in psychology, worked with Public Health England to carry out a series of mock “emergencies” on campus last year, involving over 100 student volunteers.
Around 110 Sussex students went through a decontamination process, of the type which might be used in response to the release of a suspected chemical, biological or radiological agent.
Holly found that communication from emergency responders to members of the public was essential for the smooth-running of the decontamination process; failure to effectively communicate resulted in lack of co-operation and anxiety. During the experiment, participants received one of three levels of communication:
Good: health-focused information about decontamination, updates about actions being taken, sufficient practical information.
Standard practice: no health-focused information, no updates about actions being taken, sufficient practical information.
Poor: no health-focused information, no updates about actions being taken, very basic practical information.
The decontamination process progressed most efficiently in the good communication condition, and non-compliance and confusion were observed least often in this condition.
Holly said: “Non-compliance during an incident involving mass decontamination could have extremely serious consequences. It may result in increased spread of any contaminant and therefore increased numbers of dead and injured. Yet, decontamination guidance documents for emergency services, such as the fire service, do not contain any guidance on communicating with members of the public. Furthermore, emergency responders do not receive any training on how to communicate with members of the public. Instead, a ‘control’ management strategy is often emphasised, based on the idea that members of the public will necessarily ‘panic’, and behave in a ‘disorderly’ way.”
Holly’s research will be published by Public Health England and will help inform how the emergency services in the UK train for and respond to emergencies.
She recommends that emergency responders should:
communicate openly with members of the public about actions they are taking;
communicate in a health-focused way about decontamination; and
provide members of the public with sufficient practical information
respect public concerns about privacy.
Holly added: “Our findings underline the importance of training for emergency responders on ‘soft skills’, such as communication, and the need to respect public needs for privacy. This has been neglected until now in favour of technical solutions, and hence technical preparation and training.”
Holly’s PhD at Sussex is being supervised by Dr John Drury who is an expert in crowd behaviour.
