Ensuring a competent public health responder workforce: The CDC experience.

INTRODUCTION: From 2009 to 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) activated its Incident Management System for a public health emergency 91 percent of the time. The CDC must ensure its workforce is prepared for the evolving nature of emergencies. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this assessment was to identify perceived preparedness and response training needs for the CDC responder workforce. METHODS: Between November 2012 and January 2013, focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted with CDC responders, including senior leaders. The evaluation questions were: (1) How well does the current training system prepare CDC staff to respond to emergency events? (2) What gaps exist in the current training system? and (3) What trainings are essential and should be included in the training system? RESULTS: Eight focus groups were conducted with 51 responders and 18 interviews with response leaders. Themes were identified for each main outcome measure and translated to training improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The CDC workforce received foundational training. Recommendations are provided to better prepare responders during an emergency. Periodic assessments are necessary to expand training and remain responsive to the complexities of emerging threats.

A qualitative study of Realtor knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to radon health effects: implications for comprehensive cancer control.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, and radon exposure is the second leading risk factor. Fewer than 25% of existing U.S. homes have been tested for radon, and only 5-10% of new homes use some form of radon prevention. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study sought to determine radon-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Realtors to inform cancer control activities at local and state levels. METHODS: We conducted focus groups with Realtors in four states to collect information about knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding radon. RESULTS: Realtors reported obtaining information on radon in similar ways, being aware of radon and its characteristics, and dealing with radon issues as a normal part of home sales. Differences in attitudes toward testing varied across states. Realtors in states with radon policies generally expressed more positive attitudes toward testing than those in states without policies. Radon mitigation was identified as an added expense to buyers and sellers. Realtors cited concerns about the reliability and credibility of mitigation systems and installers. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that attitudes and practices vary among Realtors and that additional educational resources about radon as a cancer risk factor may be beneficial. When comprehensive cancer control programs update their plans, they may want to add objectives, strategies, or activities to reduce radon exposure and prevent lung cancer. These activities could include partnering with Realtors to improve their knowledge, attitudes, and practices about radon, as well as developing and distributing radon educational resources.