Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
2.
Glob Health Res Policy ; 7(1): 11, 2022 04 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1817294

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Virtual global health partnership initiatives (VGHPIs) evolved rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure partnership continuity. However the current landscape for VGHPI use and preference is unknown. This study aimed to increase understanding of GH partners' perspectives on VGHPIs. METHODS: From 15 October to 30 November 2020, An online, international survey was conducted using snowball sampling to document pandemic-related changes in partnership activities, preferences for VGHPIs, and perceived acceptability and barriers. The survey underwent iterative development within a diverse author group, representing academic and clinical institutions, and the non-profit sector. Participants from their professional global health networks were invited, including focal points for global health partnerships while excluding trainees and respondents from the European Economic Area. Analysis stratified responses by country income classification and partnership type. Authors used descriptive statistics to characterize responses, defining statistical significance as α = 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 128 respondents described 219 partnerships. 152/219 (69%) partnerships were transnational, 157/219 (72%) were of > 5 years duration, and 127/219 (60%) included bidirectional site visits. High-income country (HIC) partners sent significantly more learners to low- to middle-income country (LMIC) partner sites (p < 0.01). Participants commented on pandemic-related disruptions affecting 217/219 (99%) partnerships; 195/217 (90%) were disruption to activities; 122/217 (56%) to communication; 73/217 (34%) to access to professional support; and 72/217 (33%) to funding. Respondents indicated that VGHPIs would be important to 206/219 (94%) of their partnerships moving forward. There were overall differences in resource availability, technological capacity, and VGHPI preferences between LMIC and HIC respondents, with a statistically significant difference in VGHPI acceptability (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups regarding VGHPIs' perceived barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic disrupted essential partnership elements, compounding differences between LMIC and HIC partners in their resources and preferences for partnership activities. VGHPIs have the potential to bridge new and existing gaps and maximize gains, bi-directionality, and equity in partnerships during and after COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Global Health , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , International Cooperation , Pandemics
3.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-292277

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDVirtual global health partnership initiatives (VGHPIs) evolved rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure partnership continuity, however the current landscape for VGHPI use and preference is unknown. This study aimed to increase understanding of GH partners’ perspectives on VGHPIs.METHODSFrom 15 October to 30 November 2020, authors conducted an online, international survey using snowball sampling to document pandemic-related changes in partnership activities;preferences for VGHPIs;and perceived acceptability and barriers. Analysis stratified responses by country income classification and partnership type. RESULTSA total of 128 respondents described 219 partnerships. 152/219 (69%) partnerships were transnational, 157/219 (72%) were of >5 years duration, and 127/219 (60%) included bidirectional site visits. High-income country (HIC) partners sent significantly more learners to low- to middle-income country (LMIC) partner sites ( P< 0.01). Participants commented on pandemic-related disruptions affecting 217/219 (99%) partnerships;195/217 (90%) were disruption to activities;122/217 (56%) to communication;73/217 (34%) to access to professional support;and 72/217 (33%) to funding. Respondents indicated that VGHPIs would be important to 206/219 (94%) of their partnerships moving forward. There were overall differences in resource availability, technological capacity, and VGHPI preferences between LMIC and HIC respondents, with a statistically significant difference in VGHPI acceptability (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between groups regarding VGHPIs’ perceived barriers. CONCLUSIONSThe pandemic disrupted essential partnership elements, compounding differences between LMIC and HIC partners in their resources and preferences for partnership activities. VGHPIs have the potential to bridge new and existing gaps and maximize gains, bi-directionality, and equity in partnerships during and after COVID-19.

4.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(1): 217-221, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1437321

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic plunged hospital systems into resource-deprived conditions unprecedented since the 1918 flu pandemic. It brought forward concerns around ethical management of scarcity, racism and distributive justice, cross-disciplinary collaboration, provider wellness, and other difficult themes. We, a group of medical educators and global health educators and clinicians, use the education literature to argue that experience gained through global health activities has greatly contributed to the effectiveness of the COVID-19 pandemic response in North American institutions. Support for global health educational activities is a valuable component of medical training, as they build skills and perspectives that are critical to responding to a pandemic or other health system cataclysm. We frame our argument as consideration of three questions that required rapid, effective responses in our home institutions during the pandemic: How can our health system function with new limitations on essential resources? How do we work at high intensity and volume, on a new disease, within new and evolving systems, while still providing high-quality, patient-centered care? And, how do we help personnel manage an unprecedented level of morbidity and mortality, disproportionately affecting the poor and marginalized, including moral difficulties of perceived care rationing?


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physicians , Global Health , Humans , North America , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 105(2): 407-412, 2021 Jun 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1285449

ABSTRACT

Global health partnerships (GHPs) have encountered many challenges during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. New perspectives and insights are needed to guide GHPs when navigating current and future collaborations. This study aimed to understand perspectives and insights of international partners regarding how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted their GHPs with institutions in the United States. We performed a cross-sectional qualitative study conducted through virtual semi-structured interviews performed between June 12, 2020 and July 22, 2020. We queried academic institutions based in the United States to refer individuals from their corresponding international GHP organizations. We invited these individuals to participate in virtual interviews that were audio-recorded and transcribed. We analyzed data qualitatively to identify themes. Eighty-four United States partners provided e-mail addresses for international partners. Ten individuals from these GHPs completed the interview. Participants reported overall positive experiences with their United States-based partners during the pandemic. The following themes emerged: imbalanced decision-making; worry about partnership continuity; opportunity to optimize communication within partnerships; interest in incorporating technology to facilitate engagement; and a desire for increased bilateral exchanges. Several challenges appeared to exist before COVID-19 and were highlighted by the pandemic. Most respondents were optimistic regarding the future of their GHPs. However, concerns were expressed regarding the implications of fewer in-person international experiences with United States trainees and the desire for stronger communication. Although our results do not represent the perspectives and insights of all GHPs, they provide considerations for the future. We urge institutions in the United States to re-examine and strive for equitable relationships with their international partners.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Global Health , International Cooperation , Internationality , Organizations , COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Decision-Making , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Communication , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Training Support , United States
6.
Curr Trop Med Rep ; 8(3): 183-189, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1230305

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), continues to affect individuals, communities, and health systems worldwide. Here, we highlight how COVID-19 threatens to jeopardize the tremendous gains made over the last few decades on improving children's health globally. RECENT FINDINGS: In contrast to adults, children with COVID-19 are less likely to develop severe disease requiring hospitalization or die as a direct result of infection. However, the pandemic will likely have other important health impacts disproportionately affecting vulnerable children globally. Possible effects include worsening of poverty and food insecurity; disruption of already strained routine child health services; damage to already imperiled healthcare workforces; a wave of mental health challenges; interruption of education; and increased risks of violence, abuse, exploitation, and neglect. These challenges notwithstanding, the response to COVID-19 may also provide opportunities, such as for health system strengthening, that could improve child health after the pandemic. SUMMARY: The negative impacts of COVID-19 on global child health may be substantial. However, these are not foregone conclusions and much can be done to mitigate the worst outcomes. Child health providers should advocate for an equitable response to COVID-19 that prioritizes the health of vulnerable children and furthers the gains made in global child health.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL