Search

In this article, we examine what the role of the private sector in times of crises is and whether the private sector is, and can be held to be, accountable. COVID-19 has amplified the difficulties with public–private partnerships and this article addresses several aspects concerning business enterprises, in particular transnational corporations, human rights and health sector activities, highlighting the key aspects to understand and address accountability issues. The article also explores accountability for the private sector, the processes to ensure accountability, and the relevance of regulation and self-regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Influenza vaccination is an important public health intervention for controlling disease burden, but coverage rates are still low also in risk groups. In order to identify non-vaccinating subgroups, deprivation and socio-economic indices, i.e. measures used to synthetically describe people's socio-economic status while taking into account several dimensions, may be used. We aimed to synthetize evidence from studies investigating association between deprivation/socio-economic indices and influenza vaccination coverage in population at risk—persons ≥65 years of age, individuals with comorbidities, pregnant women and health-care workers. Methods We searched PubMed, ISI WoS, CINAHL and Scopus to identify observational studies published up to October 10th 2017 in English or Italian. Studies reporting quantitative estimates of the association between deprivation/socio-economic indices and influenza vaccination coverage in populations at risk were included. Results A total of 1474 articles were identified and 12 were eventually included in the final review. Studies were mostly cross-sectional, performed in European countries, from 2004 to 2017. Seven studies focussed on deprivation and five on socio-economic indices. Studies on deprivation indices and vaccination coverage showed that people from the most deprived areas had lower coverage. Regarding socio-economic condition, results were contrasting, even though it may also be concluded that people from lower groups have lower vaccination coverage. Conclusions Our work supports the possibility to identify people likely to have lower influenza vaccination coverage based on deprivation/socio-economic indices. Efforts should be performed in order to further strengthen robustness, transferability and suitability of these indices in addressing public health problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The elderly, defined here as subjects aged ≥ 65 years, are among at-risk subjects for whom annual influenza vaccination is recommended. For the 2018/19 season, three vaccine types are available for the elderly in Italy: trivalent inactivated vaccine (TIV), adjuvanted TIV (aTIV) and quadrivalent inactivated vaccines (QIV). No health technology assessment (HTA) of seasonal influenza vaccination in the elderly has previously been conducted in Italy. Methods An HTA was conducted in 2017 to analyze the burden of influenza illness, the characteristics, efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of available vaccines and the related organizational and ethical implications. This was then contextualized to the 2018/19 influenza season. Comprehensive literature reviews/analyses were performed and a static mathematical model developed in order to address the above issues. Results In Italy, influenza is usually less common in the elderly than in other age-classes, but the burden of disease is the highest; >10% of infected elderly subjects develop complications, and about 90% of all influenza-related deaths occur in this age-class. All available vaccines are effective, safe and acceptable from an ethical standpoint. However, aTIV has proved more immunogenic and effective in the elderly. Furthermore, from the third payer's perspective, aTIV is highly cost-effective and cost-saving in comparison with TIV and QIV, respectively. Nevertheless, vaccination coverage needs to be improved. Conclusions According to this HTA, aTIV appeared the vaccine of choice in the elderly. HTA should be reapplied whenever new relevant data become available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The current economic context calls for rationalizing health resources that can be pursued through disinvestment from low value health technologies to invest in the best performing ones, ensuring high healthcare quality. Oncology is a field where, because of high costs of health technologies and rapid innovation, disinvestment is crucial. Methods On this basis, the research team investigated through a survey, based on a questionnaire, opinions and views of representatives of European countries about disinvestment, in terms of fields of application, potential advocates and barriers, specifically focusing on cancer care. Results A total of 17 questionnaires were filled in (response rate: 32.1%). The survey showed disinvestment is applied in several countries as a tool for containing health care expenditures and identifying obsolete technologies/ineffective interventions. Clinicians' resistance to change and industries' opposition are recognized as the most important barriers to the implementation of disinvestment policies. Potential targets of disinvestment in cancer are seen in diagnostic and therapeutic areas. Conclusion Despite the agreement on fields of waste and of disinvestment policies, operational methods to put disinvestment in place are lacking. Since they should rely on an inclusive assessment of the technology, Health Technology Assessment may represent a good approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]