Striving for Health Equity: The Importance of Social Determinants of Health and Ethical Considerations in Pandemic Preparedness Planning.

Since the WHO's "Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Plan" in 1999, pandemic preparedness plans at the international and national level have been constantly adapted with the common goal to respond early to outbreaks, identify risks, and outline promising interventions for pandemic containment. Two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, public health experts have started to reflect on the extent to which previous preparations have been helpful as well as on the gaps in pandemic preparedness planning. In the present commentary, we advocate for the inclusion of social and ethical factors in future pandemic planning-factors that have been insufficiently considered so far, although social determinants of infection risk and infectious disease severity contribute to aggravated social inequalities in health.

A conceptual approach to the rationale for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allocation prioritisation.

Currently vaccines protecting from COVID-19 are a scarce resource. Prioritising vaccination for certain groups of society is placed in a context of uncertainty due to changing evidence on the available vaccines and changing infection dynamics. To meet accepted ethical standards of procedural justice and individual autonomy, vaccine allocation strategies need to state reasons for prioritisation explicitly while at the same time communicating the expected risks and benefits of vaccination at different times and with different vaccines transparently. In this article, we provide a concept summarising epidemiological considerations underlying current vaccine prioritisation strategies in an accessible way. We define six priority groups (vulnerable individuals, persons in close contact with the vulnerable, key workers with direct work-related contact with the public, key workers without direct work-related contact to the public, dependents of key workers and members of groups with high interpersonal contact rates) and state vaccine priorities for them. Additionally, prioritisation may follow non-epidemiological considerations including the aim to increase intra-societal justice and reducing inequality. While national prioritisation plans integrate many of these concepts, the international community has so far failed to guarantee equitable or procedurally just access to vaccines across settings with different levels of wealth.

Face masks: benefits and risks during the COVID-19 crisis.

BACKGROUND: The German government has made it mandatory to wear respiratory masks covering mouth and nose (MNC) as an effective strategy to fight SARS-CoV-2 infections. In many countries, this directive has been extended on shopping malls or public transportation. The aim of this paper is to critically analyze the statutory regulation to wear protective masks during the COVID-19 crisis from a medical standpoint. METHODS: We performed an extensive query of the most recent publications addressing the prevention of viral infections including the use of face masks in the community as a method to prevent the spread of the infection. We addressed the issues of practicability, professional use, and acceptability based on the community and the environment where the user resided. RESULTS: Upon our critical review of the available literature, we found only weak evidence for wearing a face mask as an efficient hygienic tool to prevent the spread of a viral infection. However, the use of MNC seems to be linked to relevant protection during close contact scenarios by limiting pathogen-containing aerosol and liquid droplet dissemination. Importantly, we found evidence for significant respiratory compromise in patients with severe obstructive pulmonary disease, secondary to the development of hypercapnia. This could also happen in patients with lung infections, with or without SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Epidemiologists currently emphasize that wearing MNC will effectively interrupt airborne infections in the community. The government and the politicians have followed these recommendations and used them to both advise and, in some cases, mandate the general population to wear MNC in public locations. Overall, the results seem to suggest that there are some clinically relevant scenarios where the use of MNC necessitates more defined recommendations. Our critical evaluation of the literature both highlights the protective effects of certain types of face masks in defined risk groups, and emphasizes their potential risks.

The history and value of face masks.

In the human population, social contacts are a key for transmission of bacteria and viruses. The use of face masks seems to be critical to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 for the period, in which therapeutic interventions are lacking. In this review, we describe the history of masks from the middle age to modern times.