A Case-Study Analysis of Communicable Disease Prevention Interventions Among Healthcare Personnel (HCPs)

Inconsistent communicable disease prevention interventions among healthcare personnel (HCPs) speaks to the limits of public health law and policy and the importance of HCPs ethical obligations. To what extent each intervention should be implemented is circumstantial and based on disease severity, disease prevalence, vaccination uptake rate, and population. Due to their profession, HCPs are at a heightened occupational risk of contracting influenza, tuberculosis (TB), and hepatitis B (HBV) due to their increased exposure to immunocompromised populations like children, the elderly, and those with chronic disease. Influenza, TB, and HBV will be utilized as case studies for investigating the “spectrum” of communicable disease prevention interventions among HCPs. Each disease is unique in its history, vaccine efficacy, vaccine uptake among HCPs, and regulation. Taking a case-study approach to investigating communicable disease prevention interventions among HCPs requires clear and effective comparative methods. Semi-structured, open-ended interviews and critical document analysis are chosen as methods to properly execute the case study comparison. The interviews and documents will be analyzed using NVivo software. In forming communicable disease prevention interventions, methods of persuasion and coercion are both necessary, for neither is sufficient (Colgrove, 2016). This project outlines the complexity of decision making processes for implementing influenza, TB and HBV prevention interventions among HCPs in Israel. Each disease poses a significant threat for HCPs and healthcare settings, yet communicable disease prevention regulation, including vaccine policy, is either inconsistent, not properly upheld, or fragmentary. It aims to create model interventions for preventing communicable diseases among HCPs in Israel.