Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , Asymptomatic Infections/therapy , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Humans , Needs Assessment , Occupational Health/standards , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2/physiologyABSTRACT
This Viewpoint discusses 3 areas in need of progress regarding societal approaches to pandemics and other health threats: a renaissance in public health; robustness of primary health care; and resilience of individuals and communities, with higher levels of trust in government and society.
Subject(s)
Disaster Planning , Pandemics , Public Health , Quality Improvement , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public Health/methods , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Quality Improvement/standards , Disaster Planning/methods , Disaster Planning/standardsSubject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Public Health/standards , Safety/standards , Social Isolation , COVID-19/transmission , Canada , Humans , Risk AssessmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The current Coronavirus disease pandemic reveals political and structural inequities of the world's poorest people who have little or no access to health care and yet the largest burdens of poor health. This is in parallel to a more persistent but silent global health crisis, antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We explore the fundamental challenges of health care in humans and animals in relation to AMR in Tanzania. METHODS: We conducted 57 individual interviews and focus groups with providers and patients in high, middle and lower tier health care facilities and communities across three regions of Tanzania between April 2019 and February 2020. We covered topics from health infrastructure and prescribing practices to health communication and patient experiences. RESULTS: Three interconnected themes emerged about systemic issues impacting health. First, there are challenges around infrastructure and availability of vital resources such as healthcare staff and supplies. Second, health outcomes are predicated on patient and provider access to services as well as social determinants of health. Third, health communication is critical in defining trusted sources of information, and narratives of blame emerge around health outcomes with the onus of responsibility for action falling on individuals. CONCLUSION: Entanglements between infrastructure, access and communication exist while constraints in the health system lead to poor health outcomes even in 'normal' circumstances. These are likely to be relevant across the globe and highly topical for addressing pressing global health challenges. Redressing structural health inequities can better equip countries and their citizens to not only face pandemics but also day-to-day health challenges.
Subject(s)
Health Inequities , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/standards , Social Determinants of Health/standards , Animals , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Global Health/standards , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Social Determinants of Health/economics , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical data , Tanzania/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Mental disorders account for at least 18% of global disease burden, and the associated annual global costs are projected to be US$6 trillion by 2030. Evidence-based, cost-effective public mental health (PMH) interventions exist to prevent mental disorders from arising, prevent associated impacts of mental disorders (including through treatment), and promote mental wellbeing and resilience. However, only a small proportion of people with mental disorders receive minimally adequate treatment. Compared with treatment, there is even less coverage of interventions to prevent the associated impacts of mental disorders, prevent mental disorders from arising, or promote mental wellbeing and resilience. This implementation failure breaches the right to health, has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, and results in preventable suffering, broad impacts, and associated economic costs. In this Health Policy paper, we outline specific actions to improve the coverage of PMH interventions, including PMH needs assessments, collaborative advocacy and leadership, PMH practice to inform policy and implementation, training and improvement of population literacy, settings-based and integrated approaches, use of digital technology, maximising existing resources, focus on high-return interventions, human rights approaches, legislation, and implementation research. Increased interest in PMH in populations and governments since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic supports these actions. Improved implementation of PMH interventions can result in broad health, social, and economic impacts, even in the short-term, which support the achievement of a range of policy objectives, sustainable economic development, and recovery.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Policy , Mental Disorders/therapy , Mental Health Services/organization & administration , Mental Health Services/standards , Mental Health/standards , Public Health/standards , HumansABSTRACT
As some states approach endemic status, others face more misery.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Public Health/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Public Health/trends , United StatesSubject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Disaster Planning/organization & administration , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public Health/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Communication , Community Participation , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Female , Health Workforce/organization & administration , Human Rights/ethics , Humans , Organizational Objectives , Population Surveillance/methods , Psychosocial Support Systems , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sexual and Gender Minorities/psychologyABSTRACT
After the 2003 SARS epidemic, China started constructing a primary-level emergency response system and focused on strengthening and implementation of policies, resource allocation. After 17 years of restructuring, China's primary-level response capabilities towards public health emergencies have greatly improved. During the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic, primary-level administrative and medical personnel, social organisations, volunteers, etc. have played a significant role in providing professional services utilising the primary-level emergency response system of 17 years. However, China's organisations did not learn their lesson from the SARS epidemic, and certain problems are exposed in the system. By analysing the experience and shortcomings of China's disease prevention and control system at the primary level, we can focus on the development of disease control systems for major epidemics in the future.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Emergency Medical Services/standards , Epidemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Public Health/standards , COVID-19 , China , Emergency Medical Services/organization & administration , Emergency Medical Services/trends , Health Policy/trends , Humans , Information Dissemination/methods , Information Technology/trends , Vulnerable PopulationsABSTRACT
Racially and ethnically diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities have historically been disproportionately affected by disasters and public health emergencies in the United States. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Minority Health established the National Consensus Panel on Emergency Preparedness and Cultural Diversity to provide guidance to agencies and organizations on developing effective strategies to advance emergency preparedness and eliminate disparities among racially and ethnically diverse communities during these crises. Adopting the National Consensus Panel recommendations, the Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Health Equity; Language Services; and academic-community partnerships used existing health equity resources and expertise to develop an operational framework to support the organization's COVID-19 response and to provide a framework of health equity initiatives for other academic medical centers. This operational framework addressed policies to support health equity patient care and clinical operations, accessible COVID-19 communication, and staff and community support and engagement, which also supported the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care. Johns Hopkins Medicine identified expanded recommendations for addressing institutional policy making and capacity building, including unconscious bias training for resource allocation teams and staff training in accurate race, ethnicity, and language data collection, that should be considered in future updates to the National Consensus Panel's recommendations.
Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , COVID-19/ethnology , Disasters/prevention & control , Health Equity/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Civil Defense/organization & administration , Consensus , Cultural Diversity , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Government Programs/organization & administration , Government Programs/standards , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Humans , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Policy Making , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Social Participation , Socioeconomic Factors , United States/epidemiologySubject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antigens, Viral/immunology , Automation , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines , Critical Care/standards , Delivery of Health Care , Drug Approval , Humans , Infectious Disease Medicine/standards , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , Saliva , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that hit the world in 2020 triggered a massive dissemination of information (an "infodemic") about the disease that was channeled through the print, broadcast, web, and social media. This infodemic also included sensational and distorted information about drugs that likely first influenced opinion leaders and people particularly active on social media and then other people, thus affecting choices by individual patients everywhere. In particular, information has spread about some drugs approved for other indications (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, favipiravir, and umifenovir) that could have led to inappropriate and therefore hazardous use. In this article, we analyze the rationale behind the claims for use of these drugs in COVID-19, the communication about their effects on the disease, the consequences of this communication on people's behavior, and the responses of some influential regulatory authorities in an attempt to minimize the actual or potential risks arising from this behavior. Finally, we discuss the role of pharmacovigilance stakeholders in emergency management and possible strategies to deal with other similar crises in the future.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Drug Utilization/trends , Information Dissemination , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Public Health , Attitude to Health , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/classification , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Humans , Information Dissemination/ethics , Information Dissemination/methods , Medication Therapy Management/ethics , Medication Therapy Management/standards , Pharmacovigilance , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Public Health/methods , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Media/ethics , Social Media/standards , Social Medicine/ethics , Social Medicine/standards , COVID-19 Drug TreatmentABSTRACT
The present Special Issue focuses on the latest approaches to health and public health microbiology using multiomics [...].
Subject(s)
Bacteria/growth & development , Holistic Health/standards , Metabolome , Metagenome , Microbiota , Proteome , Public Health/standards , Bacteria/classification , Bacteria/genetics , Bacteria/isolation & purification , HumansSubject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/standards , COVID-19/prevention & control , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./standards , Personal Autonomy , Public Health/standards , Vaccination/psychology , Vaccination/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Decision Making , Female , Humans , Male , Mandatory Programs , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United StatesSubject(s)
Civil Defense/organization & administration , Crisis Intervention/organization & administration , Disaster Planning/organization & administration , National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, U.S., Health and Medicine Division/organization & administration , Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System , Emergencies , Humans , Planning Techniques , Public Health/standards , United StatesABSTRACT
Ten years of the Syrian war had a devastating effect on Syrian lives, including millions of refugees and displaced people, enormous destruction in the infrastructure, and the worst economic crisis Syria has ever faced. The health sector was hit hard by this war, up to 50% of the health facilities have been destroyed and up to 70% of the healthcare providers fled the country seeking safety, which increased the workload and mental pressure for the remaining medical staff. Five databases were searched and 438 articles were included according to the inclusion criteria, the articles were divided into categories according to the topic of the article.Through this review, the current health status of the Syrian population living inside Syria, whether under governmental or opposition control, was reviewed, and also, the health status of the Syrian refugees was examined according to each host country. Public health indicators were used to summarize and categorize the information. This research reviewed mental health, children and maternal health, oral health, non-communicable diseases, infectious diseases, occupational health, and the effect of the COVID - 19 pandemic on the Syrian healthcare system. The results of the review are irritating, as still after ten years of war and millions of refugees there is an enormous need for healthcare services, and international organization has failed to respond to those needs. The review ended with the current and future challenges facing the healthcare system, and suggestions about rebuilding the healthcare system.Through this review, the major consequences of the Syrian war on the health of the Syrian population have been reviewed and highlighted. Considerable challenges will face the future of health in Syria which require the collaboration of the health authorities to respond to the growing needs of the Syrian population. This article draws an overview about how the Syrian war affected health sector for Syrian population inside and outside Syria after ten years of war which makes it an important reference for future researchers to get the main highlight of the health sector during the Syrian crisis.
Subject(s)
Public Health/standards , Refugees/statistics & numerical data , Warfare/statistics & numerical data , Altruism , Developing Countries/statistics & numerical data , Health Resources/supply & distribution , Health Resources/trends , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Humans , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/trends , SyriaABSTRACT
A simple, common-sense, three-component procedure-the Carrier Separation Plan (CSP)-can immediately halt the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or a comparable pathogen, allow the safe reopening of an entire economy without the need for social distancing, and quickly eradicate the pathogen from the population (assuming the pathogen can be killed by the immune systems of the carriers). The three components are (a) nearly simultaneous self-testing for the pathogen by an entire population, followed rapidly by (b) nearly simultaneous self-isolation of carriers, and (c) secondary screening at entrances to facilities where people congregate. After a period of preparation lasting roughly 5-10 weeks, these steps could and probably should be taken in a single day. The power of this methodology has already been demonstrated in varying degrees with groups ranging in size from 1,000 to 11 million. Although this plan might seem daunting, its costs are minimal compared to the losses we have incurred by relying on half measures, and the US and other countries have the technological, logistical, and industrial capacities to implement this plan in a matter of weeks. With proper messaging during the weeks leading up to the testing, compliance in such a program is likely to be high given the potential benefits, and because participation is voluntary and testing is noninvasive, the legal and ethical issues associated with such a program are minimal - trivial, in fact, compared to those associated with imposing a months-long lockdown on an entire population. A SIRD/CSP model suggests that the single-day testing and separation procedure will substantially lower the number of infections, even if compliance with the procedure is modest. Modeling also suggests that when long-term secondary screening is added to the 1-day procedure, over time, the pathogen is eradicated from the population. This can occur even when compliance with secondary screening is itself relatively low.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures/standards , Mass Screening/methods , Physical Distancing , Population Surveillance/methods , Public Health/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Theoretical , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic and its social and health impact have underscored the need for a new strategic science agenda for public health. To optimize public health impact, high-quality strategic science addresses scientific gaps that inform policy and guide practice. At least 6 scientific gaps emerge from the US experience with COVID-19: health equity science, data science and modernization, communication science, policy analysis and translation, scientific collaboration, and climate science. Addressing these areas within a strategic public health science agenda will accelerate achievement of public health goals. Public health leadership and scientists have an unprecedented opportunity to use strategic science to guide a new era of improved and equitable public health.