Disaster Awareness And Preparedness Among Community Member in A Rural Mountainous Setting in the Western Himalayas

The level of community disaster awareness and preparedness is of Paramount importance. This enables the community to respond better to disasters thus reducing loss of property and lives. This study aims at identifying the level of disaster awareness and preparedness of communities in the vulnerable areas of the Himalayan valley and its risk factors. A cross sectional study was conducted to meet the study objectives among the general population of ten identified villages in the Naggar block of Kullu district. A semi structured questionnaire was used to collect information on basic disaster awareness and preparedness. A total of 192 participants consented to be a part of the study and returned completely filled survey forms. In the univariate analysis factors such as age, gender, education level, occupation and participants who had previously not faced disasters were independently associated with poor disaster awareness and preparedness. After adjusting for confounders, age >36 (AOR 2.5, 95%CI 1.02-6.3) and participants who had not faced any disasters (AOR4.02, 95%CI 1.94-8.36) were significantly associated with level of disaster awareness and preparedness. This study is a first of its kind that attempts to look at the community preparedness for disasters in a vulnerable area that is prone to natural calamities such as flash floods, earthquakes and landslides. Due to acute paucity of literature further studies are warranted in this area. I. Background and Introduction India due to its geo-climatic conditions has been a traditional “hot-spot” of various natural disasters. Natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, flash floods, cyclones, landslides etc have been a recurrent phenomenon throughout the year in some part of the country. According to the Disaster Management Report, 2005, in the decade 1990-2000, an average of about 4344 people lost their lives and about 30 million people were affected by disasters every year. (1) The loss and damage to property both private and public has been colossal and usually unaccounted for. Kullu district in the state of Himachal Pradesh has a unique geography with mountainous terrains and about 90% of its population living in rural areas situated in far-flung and inaccessible areas. (2) The community especially in an inaccessible terrain is an important stakeholder in the disaster preparedness and management. Assessing the level of disaster preparedness in the community will enable the policy makers to raise awareness and educate the community on preparing themselves in times of disaster. This study aims at identifying the level of disaster preparedness of communities and risk factors for the same, in the Manali subdivision of Kullu district. II. Materials And Methods This survey was conducted as a part of a project undertaken by the Lady Willingdon Hospital, Manali towards training and capacity building in disaster preparedness in the community. As a part of the training programme, a base line survey on disaster preparedness was done at the community level. Of the ten selected villages in which these training sessions were conducted over a period of ten days, every consecutive participant who attended these sessions were invited to participate in the study. III. Survey Instrument In the absence of a validated Questionnaire, a survey tool was developed in English after a through literature search. This tool was then translated to Hindi and then back translated to English to test for reliability. It was then pilot tested, necessary changes were made before it was used for data collection. The modified Hindi questionnaire was used to collect data on various domains of disaster preparedness. 25 questions on basic disaster awareness and preparedness were asked. The questionnaire was administered in Hindi. Those who could not read or write were assisted in filling the questionnaire. Members of the training and capacity building team were oriented about the survey instrument. Verbal consent and information on the survey was given to the participants prior to the administration of the questionnaire. Any doubts while answering the questionnaire were addressed by the team. A scoring system was developed based on the answers of the participants. The maximum possible score was 25. Disaster knowledge and preparedness were categorised as “poor”, “moderate” and Disaster Awareness And Preparedness Among Community Member In A Rural. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1606059499 www.iosrjournals. org 95 | Page “good”. The project undertaken by the mission hospital for which this survey was done was funded by the Deputy Commissioner’s Office, Kullu district. IV. Results Of the 400 participants who took part in the teaching and capacity building sessions, 210 consented to be part in the survey, of which 192 gave back completely filled questionnaires that were included in the analysis. Socio demographic profile of the participants The mean age of the study population was 36 years, with almost equal proportion of men and women (94, 49% & 98, 51%). Almost 82% of the participants (157) were educated primary level or more. There were 71 (37%) housewives while 51 (26.6%) were unemployed, 53 (27.6%) were either farmers or shop owners in this population. Further details can be seen in table 1. Table 1Participant characteristics in the survey Patient characteristics Category n % Age <=25 60 31.2 26-35 42 21.9 36-45 31 16.1 46-55 29 15.1 56-65 16 8.3 >=66 14 7.3 Gender Male 94 49 Female 98 51 Education level Illiterate 35 18.2 Primary 31 16.1 Secondary 31 16.1 Middle 63 32.8 High/ secondary high 23 12 Graduate and above 9 4.7 Occupation level Unemployed 51 26.6 House wife 71 37 Unskilled /semi skilled 5 2.6 Skilled 6 3.1 Farmer/ shop owner 53 27.6 Professional 6 3.1 Disaster preparedness and knowledge survey According to the survey only 62 participants (32%) felt that they were prepared for disaster while only 38(20%) knew the basics of first aid in this group. About 30% of the people said they knew how to use the fire extinguisher but only 11% knew if there was at least 1 fire extinguisher in the village. Only 5 (2.6%) participant knew about triaging during a disaster. Details of other responses are given in table 1. Table 2Disaster Preparedness and Knowledge Survey, key questions No Survey question Response(n=192) Yes % No % 1 Do you know what a disaster is? 155 80.7 37 19.3 2 Have you ever discussed disaster preparedness with your family? 52 27 140 72 3 Do you think your family is disaster prepared? 62 32.2 130 67.7 4 Do you know the basics of first aid? 38 19.7 154 80.2 5 Do responsible members of your family know basics of first aid? 48 25 144 75 6 Are all your important family records/ documents kept safe? 101 52.6 92 47.9 7 If in a disaster you cannot return home have you thought of a safe place to meet? 54 28.1 138 71.8 8 Do you in your village have at least 1 fire extinguisher? 21 10.9 171 89.0 9 Do you know how to use a fire extinguisher? 56 29.2 136 70.8 10 Have you kept out of village contact numbers to be contacted during a disaster? 88 45.8 104 54.2 11 Do you understand the “triage”? 5 2.6 187 97.4 12 Can you stabilise a patient before help arrives? 37 19.3 155 80.7 13 Do you have emergency contact numbers in your house? 75 39.1 117 60.9 Disaster Awareness And Preparedness Among Community Member In A Rural. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1606059499 www.iosrjournals. org 96 | Page 15 Do you have emergency contact numbers in your village? 86 44.8 106 55.2 16 Do you know any disease that may spread after a disaster? 33 17.2 159 82.8 When asked about “what would your reaction be if their house is on fire? ” Almost 41% of the respondent said that they will try to put it under control while 40% said they would not know what to do. Very few (4.6%) said they will call the fire brigade or other emergency services. (Figure 1) When asked about what their reaction would be if their village was on fire, the responses were similar with only 9.4% calling the emergency services and 36% saying that in such a situation they would not know what to do. (Figure 2) 77(40%) of the respondents identified their kitchen, while 41(21%) said that the wood storage place within the house was a potential hazardous site. Only 77(40%) could identify hazardous sites in the village. (Table 3) Table 3Answers to specific questions in the survey Survey Question Category n % Potential hazardous sites in the house? Kitchen 77 40.1 Near Tandoor * 26 13.5 Wood storage area 41 21.4 House is safe 5 2.6 Don’t know 43 22.4 Are there hazardous sites in your village? Yes 77 40.1