COVID-19 revisited – is a national pandemic plan possible?

As we review health governance during the COVID-19 pandemic, we have an opportunity to reflect on these processes and ensure that future challenges might be managed in a more collaborative and whole of system response. This 'Perspective' reviews COVID-19 responses in Australia, reflects on a number of potential solutions that have been developed by organisations over the past two decades and proffers a governance framework for a Communicable Disease and Pandemic Management Authority that might assist health responses to future challenges.

Pandemic planning: data, information and evidence.

In this article, we examine the role and effectiveness of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the USA and Europe and consider possible lessons for future pandemic planning in Australia. We also 'map' the interjurisdictional communication pathways that have been secured since the election of the new Commonwealth government. We suggest a number of steps that could be taken to upgrade the collection, distribution, accessibility and timelines of key information required to improve pandemic management and national health outcomes. While it may be hard to contemplate a move to a fully integrated National capacity when we are only just emerging from the pandemic, we do have a unique opportunity to at least start the process of review. We should use the lessons we have learned to transform our systems, rather than 'tinker' with them and ensure we are better prepared for next time.

Emotional Contagion Scale and Mental Health Status during the First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, National Assessment.

Background: This great pandemic of COVID-19 has been a unique stressor that affected all communities in 2020. This study aims to examine the prevalence of anxiety and depression due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia and to study the emotional cognition scale in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methodology: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on 857 inhabitants randomly selected from the 13 administrative regions of Saudi Arabia, using a validated self-administrated questionnaire comprising six sections. The collected data were summarized and analyzed. Results: Among the majority of the studied participants, 377 (44.0%) were aged from 35 to less than 50 y. There were 489 (57.1%) females and 368 (42.9%) males, 616 (71.9%) Saudi nationals, 715 (83.4%) university-educated or postgraduate, 619 (72.2%) unmarried and 238 (27.8%) married, and 663 (77.4%) living in areas under partial lockdown. The resultant elevated total depression score was statistically significant (p<0.05) for the following: participants younger than 35y, females, Saudis, those with lower education levels, those who were married, students, those with work suspension during the COVID-19 pandemic, and amongst those who experienced complete lockdown. Among the majority of the studied participants, 355 (41.2%) showed mild depression, and 281(32.6) showed moderate anxiety, and were in the growth zone. In addition, the elevated total anxiety score was statistically significant (p<0.05) amongst the following; younger participants, females, Saudi nationals, those with lower educational levels, those who were unmarried, students, those with telework, and those with no curfew. Conclusion: The adverse mental health effects were more prevalent among particular groups of the population, such as females, adults under 35 years old, students, those with lower educational attainments, and those suffering from chronic illnesses. Anxiety was significantly correlated with depression. The practice of preventive measures, e.g., wearing masks, and social distancing to prevent the spread of COVID-19, may have had psychological benefits during the pandemic. Summary: We assessed the mental health status in Saudi Arabia during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Mild depression and moderate anxiety were prevalent problems, with many determinants and interrelations. Fear was the most infectious emotion, while happiness was the highest.

COVID-19 revisited – is a national pandemic plan possible?

In 2014, a paper entitled 'National Framework for Communicable Disease Control'2 was presented to the Department of Health via the Office of Health Protection. Successful implementation would be dependent upon appropriate funding and finally, and somewhat ironically, the paper comments An integrated, coordinated and resourced CD control system strengthens Australia's capacity to detect, prevent and respond to communicable diseases, driving improved health outcomes for the community.2 (p. 27) Similarly, in 2017 the Australian Medical Association (AMA) published a discussion paper and position statement which strongly supported 'the National Framework for Communicable Disease Control and the goal of a national implementation plan' and furthermore: The AMA calls for the immediate establishment of an Australian National Centre for Disease Control (CDC), with a national focus on current and emerging disease threats engaging in global health surveillance, health security, epidemiology and research.3 (p. 1) A recent review and analysis of the international response to the pandemic published in The Lancet4 reinforces many of the points made above and provides some telling observations and comments. The increasing lack of transparency in supply arrangements, cost of products, absence of ordering and receipting records, uncertainty of appropriateness of clinical usage of products and the ongoing sovereign risk of the Red Cross/ CSL duopoly finally forced all jurisdictions to agree to a national framework and the signing of the National Blood Agreement in 2003.6 It was a decade in the making but the Agreement provides for the implementation of a National Blood Authority and assigns roles and responsibilities.