Dynamics of complex coordination during disease outbreak

Abstract

When multiple agencies respond to a disease outbreak (i.e., H1N1 and SARS), the coordination of actions is complex and evolves over time. We know little about this because there has been no systematic empirical study of the dynamics of coordination during a disease outbreak. In this paper, we introduce an approach to the analysis of multi-agency intervention during a disease outbreak using methods previously applied to the study of social networks. The discussion is supported by a qualitative study of the implementation of the results of the analysis. We reveal that profound understanding of social network behaviour and emerging coordination concepts are corner stones for successful outbreak intervention. We look qualitatively at how Hunter New England Area Health Services applied these concepts to lead a successful coordination plan during an H1N109 endemic.

Informal Networks in Disaster Medicine

“…This explains the main difference between centrality in formal and informal coordination. In formal coordination for disaster medicine, 3 centrality is pre-designed and assigned on the basis of the wider organizational structure, which in many cases may be suboptimal, and carries the burden of assigning resources to communicate that might not even necessarily affect coordination. On the other hand, informal coordination is a premediated and conscious decision by the ego to increase the centrality stemming from the awareness of needs.…”

“…24 This explains the main difference between centrality in formal and informal coordination. In formal coordination for disaster medicine, 3 centrality is pre-designed and assigned on the basis of the wider organizational structure, which in many cases may be suboptimal, and carries the burden of assigning resources to communicate that might not even necessarily…”

“…The traditional approaches to coordination are to delegate maximum authority to a single actor, ie, a "coordination by command" approach. [2][3][4][5] This approach has been contentious, mainly because of the difficulties in selecting a suitable government disaster response networking body. Therefore, creating a system in which local knowledge flows up and down the command structure most efficiently, and in particular, for the case of Australia's complex federal system, is a major challenge.…”