Search

Digital health and learning have expanded significantly in recent decades though their use in settings of acute health emergencies has only recently begun. Growing experience among organizations working in the digital health and learning space suggest that virtual communities of practice in these areas may have value in response to health emergencies. Evaluation of recent virtual programs applied in acute health emergencies suggest that a pre-established digital learning network can serve as a valuable resource when an acute health emergency strikes. This paper introduces the concept, and explores the potential value of developing a prioritization framework, informed by health security assessments, to identify countries most vulnerable to future health crises. By using an anticipatory approach and framework to identify high risk regions, digital learning programs can be developed proactively, building networks that can be activated during emergencies. Creating and prioritizing virtual learning networks in regions at high risk of health emergencies can improve response capacities. Developing a framework to identify countries and regions of greatest risk can help policy makers, educators, and donors, focus limited resources on high need areas.

BackgroundOn April 15, 2023, the armed conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) started in Khartoum state, Sudan. This conflict was complicated by the preexisting complicated epidemiological situation and fragile health system in Sudan. This study endeavors to illuminate the pivotal role essayed by the Sudan FETP (SFETP) in enhancing the nation’s public health response, particularly amidst the tumultuous backdrop of armed conflicts that have left their indelible mark on the region.MethodsEmploying a blend of quantitative and qualitative methodologies, we investigated the SFETP’s contributions to the public health response during the initial 4 months of the conflict (April–July 2023). Sixty-four SFETP residents and graduates were invited to participate, and data were gathered through semi-structured questionnaires.ResultsA total of 44 (69%) SFETP residents and graduates were included in this study. Out of 38 SFETPs present in the states, 32 have considerably contributed to the crisis response at state and locality levels. Three-quarters of them have played key leadership, planning, and management roles. In essence, 38% (n = 12) of them have contributed to public health surveillance, particularly in data management, reports, Early Warning Alert and Response System (EWAR) establishment, and epidemic investigation. SFETPs have made special contributions to crisis response at the community level. The involved SFETPs supported WASH interventions (n = 4), and almost one-third of them strengthened risk communication and community engagement (n = 9). Despite their physical presence at the subnational level, 27% of graduates were not deployed to the crisis emergency response. Notably, throughout this time, half of the total SFETPs were formally retained during this response.ConclusionThe study highlighted the importance of FETP engagement and support during public health crises. SFETP residents and graduates played diverse roles in the various levels of public health emergency response to the crisis. However. Strategies to improve the deployment and retention of FETP residents are necessary to ensure their availability during crises. Overall, FETP has proven to be an asset in public health crisis management in Sudan.

IntroductionPublic health organizations (PHO) must prepare to respond to a range of emergencies. This represents an ongoing challenge in an increasingly connected world, where the scope, complexity, and diversity of public health threats (PHT) have expanded, as exemplified by the COVID-19 pandemic. Risk registers (RR) offer a framework for identifying and managing threats, which can be employed by PHOs to better identify and characterize health threats. The aim of this review is to establish best practices (BP) for the development of RRs within Public Health Emergency Management (PHEM).MethodsIn partnership with a librarian from Health Canada (HC), and guided by the Cochrane Rapid Review Guideline, journal articles were retrieved through MEDLINE, and a comprehensive search strategy was applied to obtain grey literature through various databases. Articles were limited to those that met the following criteria: published on or after January 1, 2010, published in the English language and published within an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development setting.Results57 articles were included for synthesis. 41 papers specifically discussed the design of RRs. The review identified several guidelines to establish RRs in PHEM, including forward-looking, multidisciplinary, transparent, fit-for-purpose, and utilizing a systems approach to analyze and prioritize threats. Expert consultations, literature reviews, and prioritization methods such as multi-criteria-decision-analysis (MCDA) are often used to support the development of RRs. A minimum five-year-outlook is applied to assess PHTs, which are revisited yearly, and iteratively revised as new knowledge arises.DiscussionBased upon this review, RRs offer a systems approach to PHEM that can be expanded to facilitate the analysis of disparate threats. These approaches should factor in the multidimensionality of threats, need for multi-sectoral inputs, and use of vulnerability analyses that consider inherent drivers. Further research is needed to understand how drivers modify threats. The BPs and recommendations highlighted in our research can be adopted in the practice of PHEM to characterize the public health (PH) risk environment at a given point in time and support PHOs policy and decision-making.

Recent research highlights the importance of breastfeeding to health across the lifecourse, yet inadequate investment to facilitate breastfeeding according to World Health Organization recommendations threatens to undermine breastfeeding’s protective effects. Western media narratives often fail to convey the significance of breastfeeding, and such narratives can hinder efforts to direct sufficient resources to scaling up effective systems and generating policy change. Delayed action disproportionately harms poor and marginalized communities. The urgency of making these investments in an era of rapidly intensifying climate change and other crises is clear. Reframing the narrative is needed to better appreciate the significance of breastfeeding as well as to recognize and address extensive efforts of undermine it. Evidence-based scientific, health professional and media discussions are necessary to recognize breastfeeding as foundational to food and health security and to enact change so that protecting, promoting and supporting breastfeeding is integrated across all policies.

ObjectivesThis study explores the interrelationship among the current sustainability agenda of the pharmaceutical industry, based on the United Nation sustainable development goals (SDGs), the elements of the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) tool, and the triad components of the One Health approach.MethodsA cross-walk exercise was conducted to identify commonalities among SDGs, JEE assessment tool, and One Health approach. An in-depth study of 10 global pharmaceutical firms' corporate sustainability reports and COVID-19 response plan for 2019–2020 was also conducted.ResultsThe result of the exercise showed the existence of a direct and indirect relationship among the SDGs, elements of JEE assessment tool, and One Health approach. For example, both no poverty (SDG 1) and zero hunger (SDG 2) are linked with food safety targets under the JEE and with human and animal health under the One Health approach.ConclusionThis study adds a new dimension emphasizing the possibility of tailoring the pharmaceutical industry's activities under the sustainability agenda to strengthen global health security while remaining consistent with the One Health approach.

Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Undoubtedly, the COVID-19 pandemic is not the first and most frightening global pandemic, and it may not be the last. At the very least, this phenomenon has though seriously challenged the health systems of the world; it has created a new perspective on the value of national, regional, and international cooperation during crises. The post-coronavirus world could be a world of intensified nationalist rivalries on the economic revival and political influence. However, strengthening cooperation among nations at different levels will lead to the growth of health, economy, and security. The current situation is a touchstone for international actors in coordinating the efforts in similar future crises. At present, this pandemic crisis cannot be resolved except through joint international cooperation, global cohesion, and multilateralism. This perspective concludes that the pandemic could be an excellent opportunity for the scope of global health diplomacy (GHD) and how it can be applied and practiced for strengthening five global arenas, namely (1) International Cooperation and Global Solidarity, (2) Global Economy, Trade and Development, (3) Global Health Security, (4) Strengthening health systems, and (5) Addressing inequities to achieve the global health targets. GHD proves to be very useful for negotiating better policies, stronger partnerships, and achieving international cooperation in this phase with many geopolitical shifts and nationalist mindset among many nations at this stage of COVID-19 vaccine roll-out.

Despite the importance of community health workers (CHWs) to health systems in resource-constrained environments, relatively little has been written about their contributions to pandemic preparedness. In this perspective piece, we draw from the response to the 2014 Ebola and 2015 Zika epidemics to review examples whereby CHWs contributed to health security and pandemic preparedness. CHWs promoted pandemic preparedness prior to the epidemics by increasing the access to health services and products within communities, communicating health concepts in a culturally appropriate fashion, and reducing the burdens felt by formal healthcare systems. During the epidemics, CHWs promoted pandemic preparedness by acting as community-level educators and mobilizers, contributing to surveillance systems, and filling health service gaps. Acknowledging the success CHWs have had in these roles and in previous interventions, we propose that the cadre may be better engaged in pandemic preparedness in the future. Some practical strategies for achieving this include training and using CHWs to communicate One Health information to at-risk communities prior to outbreaks, pooling them into a reserve health corps to be used during public health emergencies, and formalizing agreements and strategies to promote the early engagement of CHWs in response actions. Recognizing that CHWs already play a role in pandemic preparedness, we feel that expanding the roles and responsibilities of CHWs represents a practical means of improving pandemic and community-level resilience.

This article is part of the Research Topic 'Health Systems Recovery in the Context of COVID-19 and Protracted Conflict'. As the world faces global health crises such as pandemics, epidemics, climate change and evolving disease burdens and population demographics, building strong and resilient public health systems is of critical importance. The need for an integrated approach to building health system resilience; the widening of inequalities; and fears of vulnerable populations being left behind are critical issues that require Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) enquiry as independent public oversight bodies. Each country has a Supreme Audit Institution with a remit to audit public funds as an effective, accountable, and inclusive institution. Government audits are key components of effective public financial management and Good Governance. SAIs contribute to the quality of government engagement and better state-society relations through their work. As SAIs provide independent external oversight and contribute to follow up and review of national targets linked to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in their respective countries, they can play an important role in national recovery efforts. WHO and INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) have been collaborating in facilitating SAIs' audits of strong and resilient national public health systems linked to the national target of SDG 3.d in 40 countries across Africa, Americas, Asia and Oceania between 2021 and 2022. This paper aims to convey key lessons learned from the joint multisectoral collaboration for facilitating the 3.d audits that can contribute to building health systems resilience in ongoing recovery efforts. The collaboration included facilitation of the audits through professional education and audit support using a health systems resilience framework. The 3.d audits are performance audits and follow IDI's SDG Audit Model (ISAM). Following the ISAM implies that the SAI should focus on a whole-of-government approach, policy coherence and integration, and assess both government efforts at 'leaving no one behind' and multi-stakeholder engagement in implementing the chosen national SDG target linked to 3.d. WHO's Health Systems Resilience team has supported IDI and SAIs by delivering training sessions and reviewing working papers and draft reports of the SAIs from a health systems resilience perspective. IDI has provided the technical expertise on performance audits through its technical team and through in-kind contributions from mentors from many SAIs in the regions participating in the audit. In the 3.d audit, SAIs can ask how governments are acting to enhance capacity in some or all of the following, depending on their own national context and risk: forecasting, preventing and preparing for public health emergencies (PHEs) and threatsadapting, absorbing and responding to PHEs and threatsmaintaining essential health services in all contexts (including during emergencies/crises). The audits are expected to highlight current capacities of health systems resilience; the extent to which a whole-of-government approach and policy coherence have been utilised; and government efforts related to multistakeholder engagement and leaving no one behind in building health systems resilience related to progressing towards achieving the national target linked to 3.d by 2030. An overall positive achievement noted was that undertaking a complex health audit in the middle of a pandemic is possible and can contribute to building health systems resilience and recovery efforts. In their review of audit plans, draft summaries, and other work by the SAIs, both WHO and IDI have observed that SAIs have used the training and supplementary materials and applied various parts of it in their audits. This collaboration also demonstrates key considerations needed for successful partnership across multisectoral partners at global, regional and national levels. Such considerations can be applied in different contexts, including socioeconomic and health system recovery, to ensure whole-of-society and whole-of-government action in building health systems resilience and monitoring and evaluation to maintain and accelerate progress towards the national target linked to SDG3.d, health security and universal health coverage (UHC), as well as broader socioeconomic development., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Hellevik, Mustafa, Zhang, Shirsat and Saikat.)