Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 132
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Am J Nurs ; 122(1): 12-13, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1584036

ABSTRACT

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 States
2.
Epidemiol Infect ; 148: e161, 2020 07 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1531968

ABSTRACT

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 Populations
5.
Acad Med ; 96(11): 1546-1552, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493981

ABSTRACT

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 , 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/epidemiology
7.
Drug Saf ; 43(8): 699-709, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1482336

ABSTRACT

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
8.
Int J Mol Sci ; 22(19)2021 Oct 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463710

ABSTRACT

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 , Humans
11.
Global Health ; 17(1): 111, 2021 09 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430460

ABSTRACT

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 , Syria
12.
Front Public Health ; 9: 640009, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1389254

ABSTRACT

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-2
13.
Am J Public Health ; 111(8): 1489-1496, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1381329

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Equity/organization & administration , Health Planning/methods , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical data , Health Policy , Humans , Public Health/standards , United States
15.
Pan Afr Med J ; 39: 67, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1369930

ABSTRACT

Free movement between countries without a visa is allowed within the 15-country Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) region. However, little information is available across the region on the International Health Regulation (IHR 2005) capacities at points of entry (PoE) to detect and respond appropriately to public health emergencies such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). ECOWAS and the member states can better tailor border health measures across the region by understanding public health strengths and priorities for improvement at PoEs. A comprehensive literature review was combined with a self-assessment of capacities at PoEs across the fifteen member states from February to July 2020. For the assessment, the member states completed an adapted World Health Organization (WHO) self-assessment checklist by classifying capacity for seven domains as fully, partially, or not implemented. The team implemented three focus group discussion (FGD) sessions and 13 key informant interviews (KII) with national-level border health stakeholders. Univariate analysis was used to summarize the assessment data and detailed content analysis was applied to evaluate FGD and KII results. Of the 15 member states, 3 (20%) are landlocked; 3 (20%) have more than one seaport. Eleven (73%) countries have 1 designated airport, 3 (20%) have two airports, and only one country (6.7%) has three airports. Two hundred and seventy-eight designated ground crossings were identified in 12 countries (80%). Strengths across the PoE were existence of decrees and ministerial acts in some ECOWAS countries and establishment of national taskforces for the COVID-19 response at PoE in ECOWAS. Major challenges were porous borders, poor intersectoral coordination, lack of harmonized traveler screening measures, shortage of staff, and inadequate financial resources. Despite all these challenges, there are opportunities such as leveraging the regional cross-border poliomyelitis coordination and control mechanism, and existence of networks of infection prevention and control specialists and field epidemiologists. However, political instabilities in some countries pose a threat to government commitments to PoE activities. The capacity to respond to public health emergencies at PoE in the ECOWAS region is still below IHR standard. Public health capacities at a majority of IHR-designated PoE in the 15-country region do not meet required core capacities standards.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emigration and Immigration , Public Health/standards , Africa, Western , Capacity Building , Focus Groups , Humans
19.
Indian J Med Ethics ; VI(3): 1-10, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319916

ABSTRACT

The article highlights the importance of strengthening of public systems and the need for rapid scaling up of access to testing and to appropriate therapeutics in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, to have in place robust public procurement systems for drugs and diagnostics. The paper draws lessons from the Tamil Nadu experience and validates the understanding that investing in public institutions is essential for rapid responsiveness to pandemics and other public health emergencies from both the ethical and health systems points of view.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Public Health/ethics , Public Health/methods , Humans , India/epidemiology , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2
20.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 162, 2021 07 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1308097

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: When three SARS-CoV-2 vaccines came to market in Europe and North America in the winter of 2020-2021, distribution networks were in a race against a major epidemiological wave of SARS-CoV-2 that began in autumn 2020. Rapid and optimized vaccine allocation was critical during this time. With 95% efficacy reported for two of the vaccines, near-term public health needs likely require that distribution is prioritized to the elderly, health care workers, teachers, essential workers, and individuals with comorbidities putting them at risk of severe clinical progression. METHODS: We evaluate various age-based vaccine distributions using a validated mathematical model based on current epidemic trends in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. We allow for varying waning efficacy of vaccine-induced immunity, as this has not yet been measured. We account for the fact that known COVID-positive cases may not have been included in the first round of vaccination. And, we account for age-specific immune patterns in both states at the time of the start of the vaccination program. Our analysis assumes that health systems during winter 2020-2021 had equal staffing and capacity to previous phases of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic; we do not consider the effects of understaffed hospitals or unvaccinated medical staff. RESULTS: We find that allocating a substantial proportion (>75%) of vaccine supply to individuals over the age of 70 is optimal in terms of reducing total cumulative deaths through mid-2021. This result is robust to different profiles of waning vaccine efficacy and several different assumptions on age mixing during and after lockdown periods. As we do not explicitly model other high-mortality groups, our results on vaccine allocation apply to all groups at high risk of mortality if infected. A median of 327 to 340 deaths can be avoided in Rhode Island (3444 to 3647 in Massachusetts) by optimizing vaccine allocation and vaccinating the elderly first. The vaccination campaigns are expected to save a median of 639 to 664 lives in Rhode Island and 6278 to 6618 lives in Massachusetts in the first half of 2021 when compared to a scenario with no vaccine. A policy of vaccinating only seronegative individuals avoids redundancy in vaccine use on individuals that may already be immune, and would result in 0.5% to 1% reductions in cumulative hospitalizations and deaths by mid-2021. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming high vaccination coverage (>28%) and no major changes in distancing, masking, gathering size, hygiene guidelines, and virus transmissibility between 1 January 2021 and 1 July 2021 a combination of vaccination and population immunity may lead to low or near-zero transmission levels by the second quarter of 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/supply & distribution , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Health Care Rationing/organization & administration , Resource Allocation/organization & administration , Vaccination Coverage , Vaccination , Age Factors , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Incidence , Massachusetts/epidemiology , Models, Theoretical , Public Health/methods , Public Health/standards , Rhode Island/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/supply & distribution
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...