ABSTRACT
O objetivo deste estudo foi analisar a incorporação do Regulamento Sanitário Internacional (RSI 2005) no ordenamento jurídico-administrativo brasileiro, no tocante às medidas de controle sanitário relativas a cargas, meios de transporte e viajantes e as possíveis alterações de normas, competências e procedimentos nas atividades de vigilância. Trata-se de um estudo de caso, com abordagem qualitativa, do tipo descritivo e exploratório, tendo-se utilizado como fonte de dados documentos institucionais e entrevistas com informantes-chave envolvidos com a implementação do RSI (2005). Foram identificadas alterações no ordenamento jurídico-administrativo brasileiro decorrentes do RSI (2005), em normas, competências e procedimentos de controle sanitário sobre cargas, meios de transporte e viajantes. O Regulamento Sanitário Internacional em sua versão atual conforma um instrumento que, além de inserir novos conceitos e elementos para o controle sanitário em âmbito internacional e nacional, vem propiciando ao país o desvelamento de questões relacionadas a competências e procedimentos que, de certa forma, tensionam as estruturas administrativas nas áreas de vigilância e controle sanitário.
The scope of this study was to analyze how the International Sanitary Regulation (ISR 2005)has been incorporated into the Brazilian legal-administrative system, in relation to sanitary control measures involving freight, means of transportation and travelers and possible alterations to health surveillance activities, competencies and procedures. This case study has been undertaken using a qualitative approach, of a descriptive and exploratory nature, using institutional data sources and interviews with key-informants involved in implementing ISR (2005). Alterations to the Brazilian legal-administrative system resulting from ISR (2005) were identified, in relation to standards, special competencies and procedures relating to sanitary controls for freight, modes of transportation and travelers. In its present form, the International Sanitary Regulation is an instrument that, in addition to introducing new international and national sanitary control concepts and elements, also helps to clarify questions that are helpful on a national level, relating to the specific competencies and procedures which will, to a certain extent, put pressure on administrative structures in the areas of sanitary control and surveillance.
Subject(s)
Humans , Delivery of Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Brazil , InternationalityABSTRACT
El siguiente documento da cuenta del grado de avance en la implementación del RSI (2005) en Chile, de acuerdo a las áreas de trabajo sugeridas por la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), las que por facilidad del informe se han organizado en las siguientes: 1) Impulso de las alianzas con otros sectores, 2) Fortalecimiento de los sistemas nacionales de vigilancia, prevención, control y respuesta a las enfermedades, que incluye el fortalecimiento de los sistemas de alerta y respuesta, 3) Fortalecimiento de la Seguridad Sanitaria en los Viajes y el Transporte, 4) Fortalecimiento de la gestión de riesgos específicos, 5) Respaldo de los derechos, obligaciones y procedimientos, 6) Realización de estudios y vigilancia de los progresos. En cada una de las secciones se señalan el objetivo y los avances, considerando para su descripción los resultados previstos para cada una de las áreas de trabajo.
The following document realizes the degree of progress of the IHR (2005) in Chile, according to the work areas suggested by WHO, which for ease of report has been organized into: 1) promotion of partnerships with other sectors, 2) Strengthening ofthe surveillance, prevention, control and disease response national systems, including strengthening of alert and response systems, 3) Strengthening of health safety in travels and transportation, 4) Strengthening of specific risk management, 5) Support of rights, obligations and procedures, 6) Research and progress monitoring. En each section it is noted the objective and advances, considering for description the expected results for each work areas.
Subject(s)
Health Surveillance Services , National Health Surveillance System , Epidemiological Monitoring , Chile , World Health OrganizationABSTRACT
Estudio cuantitativo y cualitativo dirigido a identificar mecanismos y acciones que contribuyan a armonizar la vigilancia de la salud interfronteriza para dar respuestas oportunas y efectivas a eventos que puedan amenazar la seguridad sanitaria internacional. Se analizaron las capacidades de Brasil, Colombia y Perú en tres áreas: a) marco legal y administrativo; b) capacidad para detectar, evaluar y notificar situaciones de riesgo y c) capacidad para investigar, intervenir y comunicar situaciones de riesgo sanitario internacional. La recolección de datos se hizo mediante revisión documental, talleres, trabajo grupal y entrevistas semiestructuradas a actores clave de la vigilancia sanitaria en los tres países. El promedio nacional de capacidades para el trío de países en "marco legal y administrativo" fue de 69,4 por ciento; en "capacidad para detectar, evaluar y notificar", 83,3 por ciento, y en "capacidad para investigar, intervenir y comunicar situaciones de riesgo", 78,7 por ciento. Se deben dirigir más recursos hacia acciones coordinadas entre los tres países para fortalecer la vigilancia y el control de la salud pública en sus zonas de frontera.
A quantitative and qualitative study to identify mechanisms and actions to help harmonize cross-border health surveillance and provide a timely and effective response to events that may threaten international health security. The capacities of Brazil, Colombia, and Peru were analyzed in three areas: (a) the legal and administrative framework; (b) the ability to detect, evaluate, and report risk situations and (c) the ability to investigate, intervene in, and communicate international health risk situations. Data were collected through a document review, workshops, group work, and semistructured interviews with key individuals in health surveillance in the three countries. The average national capacity for the trio of countries within "the legal and administrative framework" was 69.4 percent; 83.3 percent in "the ability to detect, evaluate and report"; and 78.7 percent in "the ability to investigate, intervene in, and communicate international health risk situations." More resources should be directed toward coordinated action among the three countries in order to strengthen surveillance and public health monitoring in their border areas.
Subject(s)
Humans , Emigration and Immigration , International Cooperation , Population Surveillance , Public Health , Global Health , Brazil/epidemiology , Colombia/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disease Notification/economics , Disease Notification/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Promotion , Interinstitutional Relations , International Cooperation/legislation & jurisprudence , Models, Theoretical , Peru/epidemiology , Public Health Administration , Risk , Global Health/economics , Global Health/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: Describir las características y resultados de la evaluación de capacidades básicas para cumplir el Reglamento Sanitario Internacional (RSI) en puntos de entrada de Uruguay, mediante la aplicación simultánea de los instrumentos de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y el MERCOSUR, así como también las fortalezas y debilidades identificadas en ambos al ser aplicados en el terreno. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un estudio descriptivo y transversal mediante la aplicación de los instrumentos OMS y MERCOSUR de evaluación de capacidades básicas para el RSI. Se seleccionaron dos puntos de entrada (PDE 1 y 2) escogidos como muestra de conveniencia por presentar el mayor volumen de tráfico de pasajeros y bienes del país. Ambos instrumentos fueron caracterizados individual y cualitativamente en términos de fortalezas y debilidades. RESULTADOS: El valor promedio de implementación de capacidades básicas fue de 69 por ciento (OMS) y 67,4 por ciento (MERCOSUR) para el PDE 1 y de 68 por ciento (OMS) y 63,9 por ciento (MERCOSUR) para el PDE 2; se registró una diferencia promedio entre instrumentos de 1,6 por ciento para el PDE 1 y 4,1 por ciento para el PDE 2. Ambos instrumentos examinaron factores no mensurables, sujetos al juicio del evaluador, sin utilizar definiciones operacionales de las variables relevadas. CONCLUSIONES: La aplicación simultánea de los instrumentos de la OMS y del MERCOSUR arrojó niveles de implementación semejantes en los dos puntos de entrada evaluados. Estos procesos de evaluación se verían enriquecidos por el intercambio de las fortalezas y la mejora de las debilidades observadas en ambos instrumentos y registradas en el presente trabajo.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics and results of the assessment of core capacities for enforcement of the International Health Regulations (IHR) at points of entry in Uruguay through simultaneous application of the World Health Organization (WHO) and MERCOSUR instruments, and indicate the strengths and weaknesses identified in both instruments when applied in the field. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted through the application of the WHO and MERCOSUR instruments to assess core capacities for the enforcement of the IHR. Two points of entry (POE 1 and 2) were selected as a convenience sample because they had the highest volume of passenger and goods traffic in the country. Both instruments were characterized individually and qualitatively in terms of strengths and weaknesses. RESULTS: The average values for the implementation of core capacities were 69 percent (WHO) and 67.4 percent (MERCOSUR) for POE 1 and 68 percent (WHO) and 63.9 percent (MERCO-SUR) for POE 2. The average differences recorded between the instruments were 1.6 percent for POE 1 and 4.1 percent for POE 2. Both instruments examined nonmeasurable factors that are subject to the evaluator's judgment, without using operational definitions of the relevant variables. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous application of the WHO and MERCOSUR instruments yielded similar levels of implementation at the two points of entry assessed. The assessment processes of the two instruments would be enhanced by capitalizing on each other's strengths and addressing the weaknesses observed and recorded in this study.