Skip to main content

Table 3 Associations between EPPMa categories and self-reported willingness to respond (WTR) to a pandemic flu emergency

From: Characterizing hospital workers' willingness to report to duty in an influenza pandemic through threat- and efficacy-based assessment

   

WTR if required

WTR if asked, but not required

  

%b

% Agreec

OR (95%CI)d

% agree

OR (95%CI)

By EPPM categories

     

EPPM - Threat

Low

51.2

79.0

Reference

69.9

Reference

 

High

48.8

86.8

1.58

75.2

1.23

    

(1.25 - 1.98)

 

(1.02 - 1.49)

EPPM - Efficacy

Low

51.4

72.6

Reference

58.6

Reference

 

High

48.6

95.8

9.33

88.9

5.86

    

(6.66 - 13.08)

 

(4.63 - 7.41)

EPPM - Combined

Low Threat/Low Efficacy

30.3

69.3

Reference

57.7

Reference

 

Low Threat/High Efficacy

21.2

96.3

13.09

90.1

7.12

    

(7.67 - 22.34)

 

(4.94 - 10.25)

 

High Threat/Low Efficacy

21.2

77.6

1.41

60.9

1.10

    

(1.05 - 1.90)

 

(0.85 - 1.42)

 

High Threat/High Efficacy

27.3

95.6

9.25

88.6

5.52

    

(5.94 - 14.40)

 

(4.03 - 7.56)

  1. a Extended Parallel Process Model
  2. b Percent of respondents included in category
  3. c Percent agreeing with WTR statement (positive response)
  4. d OR is the odds ratio provided in the logistic regression which compares the odds between a positive WTR response and a negative WTR response with respect to this EPPM category compared to its Reference category, adjusted for key demographic characteristics: gender, age, hours/week worked, highest education level completed and children/marital status.
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us