Search

AbstractIntroduction:Mass gatherings (MGs) usually represent significant challenges for the public health and safety sector of the host cities. Organizing a safe and successful mass event highly depends on the effective collaboration among different public and private organizations. It is necessary to establish successful coordination to ensure that all the key stakeholders understand their respective roles and responsibilities. The inconsistency between the variety of participating agencies because of their different culture can result in delays in decision making. Interorganizational knowledge transfer can improve the success of the event; however, knowledge transfer among professionals and agencies in MGs is not well-documented.Objective:This study used the 2018 Athens Marathon as the empirical setting to examine how interorganizational knowledge transfer was perceived among the multiple public health and safety professionals during the planning stage of the event.Methods:Data comprised 18 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with key informants, direct observations of meetings, and documentary analysis. Open coding and thematic analysis were used to analyze the data.Results:Findings indicated that sharing the acquired knowledge was a necessary and challenging step to create an enabling collaborative environment among interacting organizations. Experiential learning was identified as a significant factor, which helped promote joint understanding and partnership work. Informal interpersonal exchanges and formal knowledge transfer activities facilitated knowledge sharing across organizational boundaries, helping to break down silos.Conclusion:Interorganizational knowledge transfer is a necessary step to achieve joint understanding and create an environment where interaction among agencies can be more effective. The study findings can be beneficial for organizers of marathons and other mass sporting events to support valuable interorganizational collaboration and conduct a safe event.

AbstractIntroduction:Mass gatherings (MGs) often bring together professionals and organizations that collaborate irregularly or have never engaged in joint working. They involve interaction and communication among multiple and diverse services, which can often prove challenging. Planning such an event is of paramount importance for its success, and interorganizational communication ranks among its most important aspects. Nonetheless, there is limited empirical evidence to support interagency communication in MGs.Objective:This study used the 2017 Athens Marathon (Athens, Greece) as the empirical setting to examine how interorganizational communication was perceived among the multiple public health and safety professionals during the planning and implementation phase of the event.Methods:Data comprised 15 semi-structured in-depth interviews with key informants, direct observations of meetings and the event itself, and documentary analysis. Open coding and thematic analysis were used to analyze the data.Results:Findings indicated three key components of interorganizational communication in such an event: (1) shared situational awareness; (2) interorganizational understanding; and (3) implementing liaison officers.Conclusion:This study outlined the factors that influenced interorganizational communication before and during a MG. Practical implications arising from this study may inform the way organizers of marathons and other mass sporting events can engage in effective interorganizational communication.

Community pharmacists (CPs) are the most accessible healthcare professionals in primary care due to pharmacies' open-door policy and convenience, resulting in high patient and prescription volumes, and numerous free-of-charge consultations. Therefore, they are at high risk for burnout.

AbstractIntroduction:Mass gatherings pose unique challenges for interorganizational collaboration. The “Athens Marathon, The Authentic” is a 42,195m (26.2mile) race with approximately 18,000 runners that increases annually. On the same day, additional races take place and a grand total of more than 50,000 runners fill the city center of Athens, Greece. Responding effectively to unexpected incidents requires comprehensive planning, clear decision-making structure, and effective collaboration. Nonetheless, there is limited empirical evidence to support interagency collaboration in mass gatherings.Purpose:This study used the 2017 Athens Marathon and related races as the empirical setting to examine how interagency collaboration was perceived among the multiple public health and safety professionals involved in the marathon command center.Methods:Data comprised 10 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with key informants, direct observations of meetings and the event itself, and documentary analysis. Open coding and thematic analysis were used to analyze the data.Results:Findings indicated four key components of interagency collaboration in such an event: organizational culture, team synthesis, on-site spatial planning, and the usage of radio-amateurs.Conclusion:This study outlined the factors that shaped interagency collaboration in the context of a mass event. Practical implications arising from this study may inform the ways organizers of marathons and other mass sporting events can engage in effective partnerships and joint working.

Introduction:Triage at mass gathering events (MGEs) has no standard protocol that is widely accepted and applied uniformly across event types and locations. This investigation describes the current state of published literature as it applies specifically to the triage of patient presentations at MGEs, and identifies key roles and important limitations of triage methods in use at events.Method:A literature review search strategy was employed (previously published, Turris et al, 2021) to search for event case reports published for the period from 2010-2022. Included papers were reviewed and data were extracted for all references to triage; authors were contacted for any missing details. Data extraction looked specifically for the following (if available) : triage mention, triage scale used, triage categories with patient counts, triage training and any information on clinical dispositions subsequent to triage assignment.Results:A total of 60 papers were included (Data extraction in progress, numbers to be finalized for presentation). Of these papers, a minority even made mention of triage, very few specified the triage scale used, and almost none described any triage training. Only a handful of case reports contained counts of patient presentation by triage categories. A couple of papers mentioned triage scales that were event type specific (sports, etc).Conclusion:Published literature to date contains limited details and agreement on triage methods in use at MGEs. Methods are largely from the emergency and disaster domains. Triage utility appears generally to be limited to designating location and provider, and for a snapshot of acuity post event. The use of triage scale has not been solely predictive of the need for transfer to hospital.

Introduction:Contact tracing is a core public health tool used to interrupt the transmission of pathogens, including SARS-CoV-2. To increase the effectiveness of contact tracing, Greek health authorities used an electronic platform to aid traditional manual contact tracing to track individuals who have come in close contact with identified COVID-19 patients.Method:Contact tracing was implemented from the beginning of the pandemic in Greece. The aim was to identify and quarantine all the contacts of confirmed cases. The electronic database was designed following all the security protocols and national regulations on the use and protection of personal data. To assess factors associated with infectivity and susceptibility to infection in this analysis, we used contact tracing data with a sampling date between October 1 to December 9, 2020.Results:During the sampling period, 29,385 laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and 64,608 traced contacts were identified. A median number of two persons were traced per index case. The secondary attack rate was 17.4% (95% CI: 17.0-17.8). Contacts aged 0–11 and 12–17 years were less susceptible to infection than adults 65 years or older (odds ratio (OR) [95% CI]: 0.28 [0.26–0.32] and 0.44 [0.40–0.49], respectively). Index cases aged 65 years or older were more likely to infect their contacts than other adults or children/adolescents.Conclusion:Contact tracing is a key strategy to interrupt chains of transmission and to promote early diagnosis. The data collected in this process could be used to estimate epidemiological parameters of interest and to better understand factors associated with infection and susceptibility to infection. Precautions are necessary for individuals 65 or older as they have higher infectivity and susceptibility in contact with their peers.