To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Objective: Legal preparedness is a critical component of comprehensive public health preparedness for public health emergencies. The scope of this study was to assess the usefulness of combining didactic sessions with a tabletop exercise as educational tools in legal preparedness, to assess the impact of the exercise on the participants’ level of confidence about the legal preparedness of a public health system, and to identify legal issue areas in need of further improvement.
Methods: The exercise scenario and the pre- and postexercise evaluation were designed to assess knowledge gained and level of confidence in declaration of emergencies, isolation and quarantine, restrictions (including curfew) on the movement of people, closure of public places, and mass prophylaxis, and to identify legal preparedness areas most in need of further improvement at the system level. Fisher exact test and paired t test were performed to compare pre- and postexercise results.
Results: Our analysis shows that a combination of didactic teaching and experiential learning through a tabletop exercise regarding legal preparedness for infectious disease emergencies can be effective in both imparting perceived knowledge to participants and gathering information about sufficiency of authorities and existence of gaps.
Conclusions: The exercise provided a valuable forum to judge the adequacy of legal authorities, policies, and procedures for dealing with pandemic influenza at the state and local levels in Massachusetts. In general, participants were more confident about the availability and sufficiency of legal authorities than they were about policies and procedures for implementing them. Participants were also more likely to report the need for improvement in authorities, policies, and procedures in the private sector and at the local level than at the state level. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2009;3:104–110)