ABSTRACT
This article uses a health stewardship perspective to interpret the strengths of and challenges to national health authorities' capacities to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic through the renewed essential public health functions (EPHF) framework. Based on a literature review, this article argues that the institutional capacities required by countries to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Americas included all four stages of the new EPHF policy cycle: assessment, policy development, allocation of resources and access. While health authorities provided these key functions (e.g. data analysis, intersectoral policy dialogues, allocation of additional funds), the interventions implemented depended on each 'country's own institutional structures. Health authorities faced significant challenges including fragmentation and the lack of institutional and personnel capacities, thus compromising the delivery of an effective and equitable response. In addition, the response to the pandemic has been uneven due to weaknesses in central leadership and coordination capacity, the politicization of the response and differences in the capacity to respond at subnational levels. Such challenges reflect structural weaknesses that existed prior to the onset of the pandemic, as well as the low prioritization of public health in agendas for health systems strengthening. A future agenda should prioritize improving structural elements while strengthening the stewardship capacities of health authorities and developing institutional structures that guarantee access to and universal coverage of health care.
Este artigo utiliza uma perspectiva de gestão de saúde para interpretar os pontos fortes e os desafios das capacidades das autoridades nacionais de saúde na resposta à pandemia de COVID-19, por meio da estrutura renovada das funções essenciais de saúde pública (FESP). Com base em uma revisão da literatura, este artigo argumenta que as capacidades institucionais requeridas pelos países para responder à pandemia de COVID-19 nas Américas incluíram todas as quatro etapas do novo ciclo de políticas das FESP: avaliação, formulação de políticas, alocação de recursos e acesso. Embora as autoridades de saúde tenham fornecido essas funções essenciais (por exemplo, análise de dados, diálogos intersetoriais de política, alocação de fundos adicionais), as intervenções implementadas dependiam das próprias estruturas institucionais de cada país. As autoridades de saúde enfrentaram desafios significativos, incluindo a fragmentação e a falta de capacidades institucionais e de pessoal, comprometendo, assim, uma resposta eficaz e equitativa. Além disso, a resposta à pandemia tem sido desigual em decorrência de pontos fracos na liderança central e na capacidade de coordenação, da politização da resposta e de diferenças na capacidade de resposta nos níveis subnacionais. Tais desafios refletem as fragilidades estruturais que existiam antes do início da pandemia, bem como a baixa priorização da saúde pública nas agendas para o fortalecimento dos sistemas de saúde. Uma agenda futura deve priorizar a melhoria dos elementos estruturais, ao mesmo tempo em que fortalece as capacidades de gestão das autoridades de saúde e desenvolve estruturas institucionais que garantam o acesso à saúde e a cobertura universal de saúde.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic, climate change-related events, protracted conflicts, economic stressors and other health challenges, call for strong public health orientation and leadership in health system strengthening and policies. Applying the essential public health functions (EPHFs) represents a holistic operational approach to public health, which is considered to be an integrated, sustainable, and cost-effective means for supporting universal health coverage, health security and improved population health and wellbeing. As a core component of the Primary Health Care (PHC) Operational Framework, EPHFs also support the continuum of health services from health promotion and protection, disease prevention to treatment, rehabilitation, and palliative services. Comprehensive delivery of EPHFs through PHC-oriented health systems with multisectoral participation is therefore vital to meet population health needs, tackle public health threats and build resilience. In this perspective, we present a renewed EPHF list consisting of twelve functions as a reference to foster country-level operationalisation, based on available authoritative lists and global practices. EPHFs are presented as a conceptual bridge between prevailing siloed efforts in health systems and allied sectors. We also highlight key enablers to support effective implementation of EPHFs, including high-level political commitment, clear national structures for institutional stewardship on EPHFs, multisectoral accountability and systematic assessment. As countries seek to transform health systems in the context of recovery from COVID-19 and other public health emergencies, the renewed EPHF list and enablers can inform public health reform, PHC strengthening, and more integrated recovery efforts to build resilient health systems capable of managing complex health challenges for all people.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Care Reform , Humans , Public Health , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health CareABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic, climate change-related events, protracted conflicts, economic stressors and other health challenges, call for strong public health orientation and leadership in health system strengthening and policies. Applying the essential public health functions (EPHFs) represents a holistic operational approach to public health, which is considered to be an integrated, sustainable, and cost-effective means for supporting universal health coverage, health security and improved population health and wellbeing. As a core component of the Primary Health Care (PHC) Operational Framework, EPHFs also support the continuum of health services from health promotion and protection, disease prevention to treatment, rehabilitation, and palliative services. Comprehensive delivery of EPHFs through PHC-oriented health systems with multisectoral participation is therefore vital to meet population health needs, tackle public health threats and build resilience. In this perspective, we present a renewed EPHF list consisting of twelve functions as a reference to foster country-level operationalisation, based on available authoritative lists and global practices. EPHFs are presented as a conceptual bridge between prevailing siloed efforts in health systems and allied sectors. We also highlight key enablers to support effective implementation of EPHFs, including high-level political commitment, clear national structures for institutional stewardship on EPHFs, multisectoral accountability and systematic assessment. As countries seek to transform health systems in the context of recovery from COVID-19 and other public health emergencies, the renewed EPHF list and enablers can inform public health reform, PHC strengthening, and more integrated recovery efforts to build resilient health systems capable of managing complex health challenges for all people.
ABSTRACT
This article uses a health stewardship perspective to interpret the strengths of and challenges to national health authorities' capacities to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic through the renewed essential public health functions (EPHF) framework. Based on a literature review, this article argues that the institutional capacities required by countries to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Americas included all 4 stages of the new EPHF policy cycle: assessment, policy development, allocation of resources, and access. While health authorities provided these key functions (e.g., data analysis, intersectoral policy dialogues, allocation of additional funds), the interventions implemented depended on each country's own institutional structures. Health authorities faced significant challenges including fragmentation and the lack of institutional and personnel capacities, thus compromising the delivery of an effective and equitable response. In addition, the response to the pandemic has been uneven because of weaknesses in central leadership and coordination capacity, the politicization of the response, and differences in the capacity to respond at subnational levels. Such challenges reflect structural weaknesses that existed before the onset of the pandemic, as well as the low prioritization of public health in agendas for health systems strengthening. A future agenda should prioritize improving structural elements while strengthening the stewardship capacities of health authorities and developing institutional structures that guarantee access to and universal coverage of health services. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S6):S615-S620. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306750).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Government Programs , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Policy Making , Public HealthABSTRACT
RESUMEN En el presente artículo se utiliza una perspectiva de rectoría de la salud, con el fin de interpretar las fortalezas y los obstáculos relativos a las capacidades de las autoridades nacionales de salud para responder ante la pandemia de COVID-19, a través del marco renovado de las funciones esenciales de salud pública (FESP). Sobre la base de una revisión bibliográfica, se sostiene que las capacidades institucionales que necesitan los países de la Región de las Américas para responder ante la pandemia de COVID-19 incluyen las cuatro etapas del nuevo ciclo de políticas en las FESP: la evaluación, la formulación de políticas, la asignación de recursos y el acceso. Aunque las autoridades de salud proporcionaron las funciones esenciales (por ejemplo, análisis de datos, diálogos intersectoriales en materia de políticas y asignación de fondos adicionales), las intervenciones que se implementaron estuvieron sujetas a las estructuras institucionales de cada país. Las autoridades de salud tuvieron que hacer frente a desafíos considerables como la fragmentación y la falta de capacidades institucionales y de personal, lo que pone en peligro la ejecución de actividades de respuesta eficaces y equitativas. Además, la respuesta a la pandemia ha sido desigual debido a algunas debilidades en la capacidad central de liderazgo y coordinación, la politización de las actividades de respuesta y las diferencias en la capacidad de respuesta a nivel subnacional. Esos desafíos son el reflejo de deficiencias estructurales que ya existían antes de que comenzara la pandemia, así como de la asignación de una prioridad baja a la salud pública en la agenda para el fortalecimiento de los sistemas de salud. En las agendas que se elaboren en el futuro debe darse prioridad a mejorar los elementos estructurales, fortalecer las capacidades de rectoría de las autoridades de salud y crear estructuras institucionales que garanticen tanto el acceso universal a la atención de salud como la cobertura universal de salud.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a rare neurodegenerative condition characterised by a range of motor and cognitive symptoms. Very little is known about the longitudinal change in these symptoms over time. Moreover, the effectiveness of clinical scales to detect early changes in PSP is still a matter of debate. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine longitudinal changes in PSP features using multiple closely spaced follow-up time points over a period of 2 years. Methods 28 healthy control and 28 PSP participants, with average time since onset of symptoms of 1.9 years, were prospectively studied every 3 months for up to 24 months. Changes from baseline scores were calculated at each follow-up time point using multiple clinical scales to identify longitudinal progression of motor and cognitive symptoms. RESULTS: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, but not the Mini-Mental State Examination, detected cognitive decline at baseline. Both scales revealed poor longitudinal sensitivity to clinical change in global cognitive symptoms. Conversely, the Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's disease Rating Scale - part III and the PSP Rating Scale (PSPRS) reliably detected motor decline less than 2 years after disease onset. The 'Gait/Midline' PSPRS subscore consistently declined over time, with the earliest change being observed 6 months after baseline assessment. CONCLUSION: While better cognitive screening tools are still needed to monitor cognitive decline in PSP, motor decline is consistently captured by clinical rating scales. These results support the inclusion of multiple follow-up time points in longitudinal studies in the early stages of PSP.
ABSTRACT
Leveraging economies of scale and scope through multi-country pooled procurement enables countries to increase access to quality affordable essential medicines and supplies that meet priority health objectives as well as effectively respond to health emergencies. Strategic partnerships and tools can minimize supply chain disruptions and streamline procurement and deployment in health emergencies, thus mitigating stockouts and ensuring cost efficiencies across various therapeutic areas, including for public health programs at a time when countries may struggle to meet complex needs. As a means to better respond to health emergencies while maintaining priority public health programs, countries should optimize usage of pooled procurement mechanisms facilitated by multilateral technical cooperation and other regional mechanisms, such as the Pan American Health Organization's Strategic Fund. Because few analyses have assessed the role of such regional procurement mechanisms, this Health Policy paper evaluates the key areas of impact of the PAHO Strategic Fund and concludes with lessons learned to help prepare for future health crises while maintaining essential health services.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a recommended treatment for chronic refractory neuropathic pain. During the COVID-19 pandemic, elective procedures have been postponed indefinitely both to provide capacity to deal with the emergency caseload and to avoid exposure of elective patients to COVID-19. This survey aimed to explore the effect of the pandemic on chronic pain in this group and the views of patients towards undergoing SCS treatment when routine services should resume. METHODS: This was a prospective, multi-centre telephone patient survey that analysed data from 330 patients with chronic pain who were on an SCS waiting list. Questions focussed on severity of pain, effect on mental health, medication consumption and reliance on support networks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Views towards undergoing SCS therapy were also ascertained. Counts and percentages were generated, and chi-square tests of independence explored the impact of COVID-19 risk (very high, high, low) on survey responses. RESULTS: Pain, mental health and patient's ability to self-manage pain deteriorated in around 47%, 50% and 38% of patients, respectively. Some patients reported increases in pain medication consumption (37%) and reliance on support network (41%). Patients showed a willingness to attend for COVID-19 testing (92%), self-isolate prior to SCS (94%) and undergo the procedure as soon as possible (76%). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that even during the COVID-19 pandemic, there remains a strong clinical need for patients with chronic pain identified as likely SCS responders to be treated quickly. The current prioritisation of new SCS at category 4 (delayed more than 3 months) is challenged judging by this national survey. These patients are awaiting SCS surgery to relieve severe intractable neuropathic pain. A priority at category 3 (delayed up to 3 months) or in some selected cases, at category 2 are the appropriate priority categories.