Search

Background/Introduction:Health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic strain health systems and emergency response mechanisms. Identifying critical points during the response cycle where emergency workforce and operational capacity can be improved can help break the protracted nature of responses. Global health emergency workforce, or health emergency and alert response teams such as multidisciplinary Public Health Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) and Emergency Medical Teams (EMTs), play critical roles in the response to public health emergencies.Objectives:The project aims to explore and understand how countries manage and operationalize their RRT and EMT programs. With anecdotal evidence of countries integrating the two historically disparate groups, we propose to examine how countries are jointly or separately addressing legal frameworks and policies; management practices; reporting processes and protocols; training; as well as program operations and standards.Method/Description:Through existing global partnerships and networks, a convenience sample of national focal points responsible for the management of their RRT and EMT program are sent an online survey followed by participating in a one-on-one interview. Quantitative and qualitative analyses will be conducted.Results/Outcomes:Twelve countries representing all six World Health Organization regions with both RRT and EMT programs have been selected for engagement.Conclusion:Factors contributing to or against countries integration of RRT and EMT programs will be identified. Areas of divergence or synergy of plans and standard operating procedures will be mapped. Recommendations for strengthening global health emergency alert and response teams will be generated.

Background/Introduction:In November 2021, a tanker exploded in Freetown, injuring and killing people. The WHO facilitated a seven-week first deployment of the Senegalese military to support the Ministry of Health (MOH) in providing care to the wounded in three referral hospitals.Objectives:Review the deployed team’s processes and outputs of medical care provided to burns patients.Method/Description:This is a cross-sectional After-Action Review (AAR) debrief of the deployment, including the WHO and MOH staff (n =14) in a virtual workshop. Six thematic areas: mobilization, deployment, coordination, case management activities, national capacity, and community acceptance were analyzed.Results/Outcomes:The WHO facilitated the team’s deployment and mobilized medical supplies and equipment whilst the MOH provided accommodation and logistics through collaboration. The team dispensed their functions with professionalism, adapted to the environment and available resources, and augmented the care provided by the available health workers. They offered additional care: reconstructive surgery, pain management, palliative and wound care, rehabilitation, physiotherapy, and psychosocial counselling, which were initially inadequate. 87 out of 155 patients were discharged home at the end, the national clinicians acquired additional skills, and the community appreciated the team. Despite being perceived as a weakness, the language barrier did not hinder the patient-doctor/nurse relationship or the provision of clinical care.Conclusion:This sub-regional response had significant benefits, including speed, political acceptability, and health context experience to support rapid and safe deployment. Mechanisms to facilitate rapid and quality-assured deployment of EMTs at regional and sub-regional levels in collaboration with WHO should be strengthened in region to support future responses.