Appendix B. Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Public Communication Campaign

National

First round (from May 2009)

• A national television, radio and print advertising campaign informed Australians of the Australian Government’s actions to reduce the spread of ‘swine flu’, including measures at Australia’s borders, awareness of symptoms of influenza, and measures people could take to reduce the spread of influenza.
• The campaign was also used to raise the awareness that some individuals were more likely to suffer from severe disease with pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus infection. These vulnerable groups were encouraged to be vigilant and seek medical advice if they became unwell.
• Some advertising was produced for people from non-English-speaking backgrounds, and tailored communications were developed for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander audiences.

Second round (from September 2009)

• A national television, radio and print advertising campaign promoted the free pandemic influenza vaccine.
• This campaign advised that ‘swine flu’ caused illness, hospitalisation and death and was continuing to spread throughout the community, and that the vaccine provided protection against pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus.
• Print advertising was translated into 11 languages and placed in relevant newspapers for linguistically diverse communities. A consumer brochure and poster were also produced and translated into 11 languages, and placed on the Health Emergency website.
• This campaign also included a specific Indigenous Australian focus, with print and radio advertising developed to target this audience.

Third round (from December 2009)

• A national print campaign promoted the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccine for children and encouraged parents to vaccinate their children.
• A revised consumer brochure and patient information sheet were also produced and translated, which included information on the availability of the vaccine for children.

Fourth round (from March 2010)

• ‘Facts about swine flu’ was a national radio and print advertising campaign designed to promote the Pandemic (H1N1) Vaccination Program. This campaign demonstrated that the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus was no ordinary influenza virus and that it affected young, healthy people.
• Print advertising targeting Indigenous Australians and audiences from non-English-speaking backgrounds was also undertaken during this period.

Top of Page

Research and evaluation of the national public communication campaigns

Qualitative research was undertaken in May and June 2009 to test print and radio advertising containing ‘swine flu’ information and hygiene messages. One round of testing of the concepts in the campaign was undertaken in August 2009. This informed the development process. A further two rounds of research were conducted in September 2009 with special groups including GPs, practice nurses, pregnant women, people with a chronic condition, families and ‘empty nesters’.³⁶ Two rounds of concept testing of the autumn (Round 4) campaign print and radio materials were conducted in February and March 2010 with GPs, young adults without children, parents and ‘empty nesters’.

The Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Public Communication Campaign was evaluated over two time periods: September to November 2009, and March to June 2010. Evaluation comprised a quantitative online survey of Australian adults and an online survey of Australian GPs. The adult research participants were recruited from an audited list of more than 150,000 members. Quotas were set that were representative of the Australian population for age, location and gender, and the data were post-weighted to the population using Australian Bureau of Statistics Census figures. A random sample of GPs, drawn from a Medical Internet Research Panel (MIRP),³⁷ was invited to participate. The surveys and numbers of participants are detailed in Table B.1: 2009 Survey and Table 2: 2010 Survey.

Findings from the survey in the first period (September to November 2009) were that the pandemic (H1N1) vaccination communication campaign had reached approximately two thirds (65 per cent) of the sample. Among those who had seen or heard the advertisements, the main campaign messages had been very clearly communicated. The campaign was also considered by those reached to be useful and relevant (82 per cent of those reached) and believable (87 per cent of those reached). The campaign was considered more likely to reassure (36 per cent) than increase concern (17 per cent). As well as experiencing increased awareness of the vaccine, many adults took action. By November 2009, 60 per cent of those reached had discussed the vaccine with friends or family; 30 per cent had encouraged others to get the vaccine; 29 per cent had discussed the vaccine with a doctor; and 8 per cent had visited the website.

Table B.1: 2009 survey

Wave	Stage	Date	Number surveyed
Adults (general public)
1	Benchmark survey	10–28 September 2009	823
2	Tracking survey (mid-campaign)	13–18 October 2009	906
3	Tracking survey (after campaign)	3–15 November 2009	858
GPs
1	Benchmark survey	10–28 September 2009	150
2	Evaluation (end of campaign)	13–18 October 2009	150

Top of Page

Table B.2: 2010 survey

Wave	Stage	Date	Number surveyed
Adults (general public)
4	Benchmark survey	11–20 March 2010	815
5	Tracking survey (after campaign)	1–10 June 2010	883
GPs
3	Benchmark survey	1–7 February 2010	150
4	Evaluation (end of campaign)	7–14 June 2010	150

The 2010 public information campaign did not include television, and the proportion of the population reached was, not surprisingly, lower than that reached by the previous campaign. Approximately one-third (33 per cent) of the sample surveyed had seen the campaign. It was considered by those reached to be believable
(85 per cent), and useful and relevant (77 per cent), and as more likely to reassure (40 per cent) than raise concern (26 per cent). Following the 2010 campaign, 75 per cent of those reached by the campaign were likely to take action as a result of having seen it; 55 per cent had discussed the vaccine with friends or family; 44 per cent had encouraged others to have the vaccine; 48 per cent had discussed the vaccine with a doctor; and 10 per cent had visited the Health Emergency website.

Top of Page

³⁶ Parents of adult children who have left home.
³⁷ Managed by Cegedim Strategic Data Australia.