scholarly journals Action-Based Costing for National Action Plans for Health Security: Accelerating Progress Toward the International Health Regulations (2005)

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (S1) ◽  
pp. S-53-S-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher T. Lee ◽  
Rebecca Katz ◽  
Stephanie Eaneff ◽  
Michael Mahar ◽  
Olubunmi Ojo
Keyword(s):  
International Health ◽  
Action Plans ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Health Regulations

scholarly journals Strengthening health security: an intuitive and user-friendly tool to estimate country-level costs

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. e000864 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Katz ◽  
Ellie Graeden ◽  
Stephanie Eaneff ◽  
Justin Kerr
Keyword(s):  
Capacity Building ◽  
International Health ◽  
Action Plans ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Cost Estimates ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Country Level ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
Health Regulations

Member States of the WHO working to build capacity under the International Health Regulations (IHR) are advised to develop prioritised, costed plans to implement improvements based on the results of voluntary external assessments. Defining the costs associated with capacity building under the IHR, however, has challenged nations, funders and supporting organisations. Most current efforts to develop costed national action plans involve long-term engagements that may take weeks or months to complete. While these efforts have value in and of themselves, there is an urgent need for a rapid-use tool to provide cost estimates regardless of the level of expertise of the personnel assigned to the task. In this paper, we describe a tool that can—in a matter of hours—provide country-level cost estimates for capacity building under the IHR. This paper also describes how the tool can be used in countries, as well as the challenges inherent in any costing process.

scholarly journals Developing a multisectoral National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) to implement the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005) in Tanzania

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. e000600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janneth M Mghamba ◽  
Ambrose O Talisuna ◽  
Ludy Suryantoro ◽  
Grace Elizabeth Saguti ◽  
Martin Muita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Action Plan ◽  
International Health ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
World Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Member States ◽  
Health Security ◽  
National Action Plan ◽  
Health Regulations

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa precipitated a renewed momentum to ensure global health security through the expedited and full implementation of the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) in all WHO member states. The updated IHR (2005) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework was shared with Member States in 2015 with one mandatory component, that is, States Parties annual reporting to the World Health Assembly (WHA) on compliance and three voluntary components: Joint External Evaluation (JEE), After Action Reviews and Simulation Exercises. In February 2016, Tanzania, was the first country globally to volunteer to do a JEE and the first to use the recommendations for priority actions from the JEE to develop a National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) by February 2017. The JEE demonstrated that within the majority of the 47 indicators within the 19 technical areas, Tanzania had either ‘limited capacity’ or ‘developed capacity’. None had ‘sustainable capacity’. With JEE recommendations for priority actions, recommendations from other relevant assessments and complementary objectives, Tanzania developed the NAPHS through a nationwide consultative and participatory process. The 5-year cost estimate came out to approximately US$86.6 million (22 million for prevent, 50 million for detect, 4.8 million for respond and 9.2 million for other IHR hazards and points of entry). However, with the inclusion of vaccines for zoonotic diseases in animals increases the cost sevenfold. The importance of strong country ownership and committed leadership were identified as instrumental for the development of operationally focused NAPHS that are aligned with broader national plans across multiple sectors. Key lessons learnt by Tanzania can help guide and encourage other countries to translate their JEE priority actions into a realistic costed NAPHS for funding and implementation for IHR (2005).

scholarly journals Global health security and the International Health Regulations

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. S2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Andrus ◽  
Ximena Aguilera ◽  
Otavio Oliva ◽  
Sylvain Aldighieri
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
International Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Global Health Security ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Health Regulations

scholarly journals The potential effectiveness of the WHO International Health Regulations capacity requirements on control of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study of 114 countries

2021 ◽  
pp. 014107682199245
Author(s):  
Martin CS Wong ◽  
Junjie Huang ◽  
Sunny H Wong ◽  
Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
Keyword(s):  
Regression Models ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
International Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Linear Regression Models ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Health Security ◽  
First Case ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
Health Regulations

Objectives We examined if the WHO International Health Regulations (IHR) capacities were associated with better COVID-19 pandemic control. Design Observational study. Setting Population-based study of 114 countries. Participants General population. Main outcome measures For each country, we extracted: (1) the maximum rate of COVID-19 incidence increase per 100,000 population over any 5-day moving average period since the first 100 confirmed cases; (2) the maximum 14-day cumulative incidence rate since the first case; (3) the incidence and mortality within 30 days since the first case and first COVID-19-related death, respectively. We retrieved the 13 country-specific International Health Regulations capacities and constructed linear regression models to examine whether these capacities were associated with COVID-19 incidence and mortality, controlling for the Human Development Index, Gross Domestic Product, the population density, the Global Health Security index, prior exposure to SARS/MERS and Stringency Index. Results Countries with higher International Health Regulations score were significantly more likely to have lower incidence (β coefficient −24, 95% CI −35 to −13) and mortality (β coefficient −1.7, 95% CI −2.5 to −1.0) per 100,000 population within 30 days since the first COVID-19 diagnosis. A similar association was found for the other incidence outcomes. Analysis using different regression models controlling for various confounders showed a similarly significant association. Conclusions The International Health Regulations score was significantly associated with reduction in rate of incidence and mortality of COVID-19. These findings inform design of pandemic control strategies, and validated the International Health Regulations capacities as important metrics for countries that warrant evaluation and improvement of their health security capabilities.

scholarly journals Public health event communication under the International Health Regulations (2005) in the Western Pacific Region, September 2006-January 2017

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 19-26
Author(s):  
Xi Li ◽  
Ailan Li
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
International Health ◽  
Western Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Western Pacific Region ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Health Regulations ◽  
The Western Pacific

Highlights • The International Health Regulations, or IHR (2005), establishes timely communication between the World Health Organization (WHO) and Member States to manage acute public health events and protect health security. Experiences of the WHO IHR contact point for the Western Pacific Region demonstrated the communication mechanism has achieved its functions in the Region. • Investment in IHR communication as part of the Asia Pacific Strategy for Emerging Diseases and Public Health Emergencies (APSED III) during peaceful times between public health emergencies builds capacity, confidence and trust in information sharing during emergencies. • IHR communication is integral to the national, regional and global epidemic intelligence and risk assessments system. • Regular simulation exercises (for example, IHR Exercise Crystal) play an important role in testing and strengthening IHR communication. • IHR communication continues to be vital for Member States and WHO Country Offices to advise on health security

Global Health Security Demands a Strong International Health Regulations Treaty and Leadership From a Highly Resourced World Health Organization

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 568-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick M. Burkle
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Global Health ◽  
International Health ◽  
World Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Global Health Security ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Health Regulations

AbstractIf the Ebola tragedy of West Africa has taught us anything, it should be that the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) Treaty, which gave unprecedented authority to the World Health Organization (WHO) to provide global public health security during public health emergencies of international concern, has fallen severely short of its original goal. After encouraging successes with the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) pandemic, the intent of the legally binding Treaty to improve the capacity of all countries to detect, assess, notify, and respond to public health threats has shamefully lapsed. Despite the granting of 2-year extensions in 2012 to countries to meet core surveillance and response requirements, less than 20% of countries have complied. Today it is not realistic to expect that these gaps will be solved or narrowed in the foreseeable future by the IHR or the WHO alone under current provisions. The unfortunate failures that culminated in an inadequate response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa are multifactorial, including funding, staffing, and poor leadership decisions, but all are reversible. A rush by the Global Health Security Agenda partners to fill critical gaps in administrative and operational areas has been crucial in the short term, but questions remain as to the real priorities of the G20 as time elapses and critical gaps in public health protections and infrastructure take precedence over the economic and security needs of the developed world. The response from the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network and foreign medical teams to Ebola proved indispensable to global health security, but both deserve stronger strategic capacity support and institutional status under the WHO leadership granted by the IHR Treaty. Treaties are the most successful means the world has in preventing, preparing for, and controlling epidemics in an increasingly globalized world. Other options are not sustainable. Given the gravity of ongoing failed treaty management, the slow and incomplete process of reform, the magnitude and complexity of infectious disease outbreaks, and the rising severity of public health emergencies, a recommitment must be made to complete and restore the original mandates as a collaborative and coordinated global network responsibility, not one left to the actions of individual countries. The bottom line is that the global community can no longer tolerate an ineffectual and passive international response system. As such, this Treaty has the potential to become one of the most effective treaties for crisis response and risk reduction worldwide. Practitioners and health decision-makers worldwide must break their silence and advocate for a stronger Treaty and a return of WHO authority. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:568–580)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document