The goal of this project is to map various communicable disease-prevention (influenza, TB, HBV) policies among healthcare personnel (HCP) in Israel. This project aims to create model interventions for addressing prevention interventions among HCP in Israel via contextualizing the efficacy of recognized communicable disease prevention methods aimed at HCP, attitudes of HCP on communicable disease prevention interventions, and policy and ethical implications.

Influenza, TB, and HBV will be utilized as case studies for investigating the “spectrum” of communicable disease prevention interventions among HCP. Each disease is unique in its history, vaccine efficacy, vaccine uptake among HCP, and regulation. Taking a case-study approach to investigating communicable disease prevention interventions among HCP requires clear and effective comparative methods. Semi-structured, open-ended interviews and critical document analysis are chosen as methods to properly execute the case study comparison. The interviews and documents will be analyzed using NVivo software.

Inconsistent communicable disease prevention interventions among HCP speaks to the limits of public health law and policy and the importance of HCP ethical obligations. To what extent each intervention should be implemented is circumstantial and based on disease severity, disease prevalence, vaccination uptake rate, and population. HCP are at a heightened occupational risk of contracting influenza, tuberculosis (TB), and hepatitis B (HBV) due to their increased exposure to immunocompromised populations like children, the elderly, and those with chronic disease.

In forming communicable disease prevention interventions, methods of persuasion and coercion are both necessary, for neither is sufficient (Colgrove, 2016). This project outlines the complexity of decision making processes for implementing influenza, TB and HBV prevention interventions among HCP in Israel. Each disease poses a significant threat for HCP and healthcare settings, yet communicable disease prevention regulation, including vaccine policy, is either inconsistent, not properly upheld, or fragmentary.