Monitoring the implementation of the WHO Global Code of Practice on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel.

OBJECTIVE: To present the findings of the first round of monitoring of the global implementation of the WHO Global Code of Practice on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel ("the Code"), a voluntary code adopted in 2010 by all 193 Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO). METHODS: WHO requested that its Member States designate a national authority for facilitating information exchange on health personnel migration and the implementation of the Code. Each designated authority was then sent a cross-sectional survey with 15 questions on a range of topics pertaining to the 10 articles included in the Code. FINDINGS: A national authority was designated by 85 countries. Only 56 countries reported on the status of Code implementation. Of these, 37 had taken steps towards implementing the Code, primarily by engaging relevant stakeholders. In 90% of countries, migrant health professionals reportedly enjoy the same legal rights and responsibilities as domestically trained health personnel. In the context of the Code, cooperation in the area of health workforce development goes beyond migration-related issues. An international comparative information base on health workforce mobility is needed but can only be developed through a collaborative, multi-partnered approach. CONCLUSION: Reporting on the implementation of the Code has been suboptimal in all but one WHO region. Greater collaboration among state and non-state actors is needed to raise awareness of the Code and reinforce its relevance as a potent framework for policy dialogue on ways to address the health workforce crisis.

[Better rights for sick children]. / Bedre rettigheter for syke barn.

Recognizing that healthy children are the future of Europe and the rights of every child to equitable access to health care which is appropriate, child-oriented and of good quality must be respected; The health and well-being of children are priority goals shared by all member states within the general context of human rights and the specific framework of children's rights; Investments in children's health and wellbeing ensures better outcome for the entire lifespan and may reduce the burden on health and welfare systems, since a significant number of avoidable physical and socio-psychological problems in adult life have their origin in infancy and childhood Effective and efficient child-friendly healthcare contributes to social cohesion

[Health assessment of the elderly--a practical approach?]. / Helsesjekk av gamle--kjekt å ha?

Health assessment of elderly people as a routine procedure has been proposed in official reports and in the literature. Some programmes have been evaluated, including home visits and periodical health assessment programmes, but evaluation produces conflicting results. Whether health assessment of elderly people represents true or false safety depends on the association between risk factors and end points like mortality, morbidity, functional ability and quality of life. Who should be offered a health assessment, what should be the elements, and what is the scientific documentation for such an approach? Health assessment is of little value without follow-up. Periodic large-scale home visits or screening programmes are not recommended. Health assessment of old people at risk should be carried out by the general practitioner. The community has an obligation to plan for adequate medical services to prevent elderly people at risk to deteriorate without medical follow-up.