scholarly journals Determinants of emergency response willingness in the local public health workforce by jurisdictional and scenario patterns: a cross-sectional survey

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J Barnett ◽  
Carol B Thompson ◽  
Nicole A Errett ◽  
Natalie L Semon ◽  
Marilyn K Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
Health Workforce ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Local Public Health

scholarly journals Public Health Workforce Burnout in the COVID-19 Response in the U.S.

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 4369
Author(s):  
Kahler W. Stone ◽  
Kristina W. Kintziger ◽  
Meredith A. Jagger ◽  
Jennifer A. Horney
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Workforce ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The U.S

While the health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on frontline health care workers have been well described, the effects of the COVID-19 response on the U.S. public health workforce, which has been impacted by the prolonged public health response to the pandemic, has not been adequately characterized. A cross-sectional survey of public health professionals was conducted to assess mental and physical health, risk and protective factors for burnout, and short- and long-term career decisions during the pandemic response. The survey was completed online using the Qualtrics survey platform. Descriptive statistics and prevalence ratios (95% confidence intervals) were calculated. Among responses received from 23 August and 11 September 2020, 66.2% of public health workers reported burnout. Those with more work experience (1–4 vs. <1 years: prevalence ratio (PR) = 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08−3.36; 5–9 vs. <1 years: PR = 1.89, CI = 1.07−3.34) or working in academic settings (vs. practice: PR = 1.31, CI = 1.08–1.58) were most likely to report burnout. As of September 2020, 23.6% fewer respondents planned to remain in the U.S. public health workforce for three or more years compared to their retrospectively reported January 2020 plans. A large-scale public health emergency response places unsustainable burdens on an already underfunded and understaffed public health workforce. Pandemic-related burnout threatens the U.S. public health workforce’s future when many challenges related to the ongoing COVID-19 response remain unaddressed.

Commentary: Who is Remembering Local Public Health? The Forgotten Pandemic Worker

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-117
Author(s):  
Jodi Brookins-Fisher ◽  
Alexis Blavos ◽  
Heidi Hancher-Rauch ◽  
Amy Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Workforce ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Local Public Health ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Public Health Workers ◽  
Health Experts

As the COVID-19 pandemic rages, there is no end in sight to the stress induced on the public health workforce. It is clear over the last 18+ months that the woeful underfunding of public health efforts across the US impacted the speed and agility with which public health experts have tackled the pandemic. This has led to the emotional decimation of public health workers who have plowed forward, even as they have worked long and stressful hours while also being politically and physically vilified. If this continues, what does the future of our public health workforce look like?

Ensuring the success of local public health workforce assessments: Using a participatory-based research approach with a rural population

Public Health ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 122 (12) ◽  
pp. 1447-1455 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Alejos ◽  
A. Weingartner ◽  
D.P. Scharff ◽  
E. Ablah ◽  
L. Frazier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Workforce ◽  
Rural Population ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Local Public Health

scholarly journals Master’s-Level Education in the Governmental Public Health Workforce

2020 ◽  
Vol 135 (5) ◽  
pp. 650-657
Author(s):  
Jonathon P. Leider ◽  
Katie Sellers ◽  
Kyle Bogaert ◽  
Brian C. Castrucci ◽  
Paul C. Erwin
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Workforce ◽  
Master's Degree ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Health Departments ◽  
Local Public Health ◽  
Public Health Training ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Master’S Degree ◽  
State And Local

Objectives More than 16 000 graduate degrees in public health are awarded annually. Yet only 14% of the governmental public health workforce has formal public health training of any kind, and 8% has a master of public health (MPH) degree. We characterized the differences among governmental staff members with master’s degrees across US health departments. Methods We used data from the 2017 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey, a national survey of state and local public health departments (43 669 responses; response rate, 48%). We examined the characteristics of the workforce by educational attainment and compared respondents who had obtained a “terminal” (ie, highest degree obtained) MPH degree with respondents who had obtained a terminal non–public health (non-PH) master’s degree. Results Respondents who had a non-PH master’s degree were as likely as respondents who had an MPH degree to hold a supervisory role (43% vs 41%; P = .67). We found only 1 significant difference between the 2 groups: respondents aged ≤40 with a terminal MPH degree were significantly less likely than respondents aged ≤40 with a non-PH master’s degree to earn more than the national average salary (adjusted odds ratio = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-0.97; P = .03). Conclusions We found only marginal differences in career outcomes for people working in governmental public health who had a terminal MPH degree vs a terminal non-PH master’s degree. This finding does not necessitate a full reconsideration of the MPH as it relates to governmental public health practice but a greater recognition that there are multiple paths into practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document