National Public Health Institutes: A Scoping Review

Background. During the last century, national public health institutes (NPHIs) emerged to address enduring and emergency public health challenges. Outbreaks have often compelled countries to establish NPHIs. Likewise, the Covid-19 pandemic may inspire countries to create or strengthen NPHIs. Despite their historic legacies and contributions to public health, no review of NPHI literature has been published to date. The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the NPHI literature published since 2000 and map characteristics of articles including format, authorship, geographic focus, methods, language, and focal topic. We also investigate whether the NPHI literature addresses public health capacity building domains. Finally, the study identifies gaps and areas for future research. Methods. The scoping review was guided the Arksey and O’Malley methodological framework and utilized the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The search was conducted in Medline OVID and Scopus databases. Data extraction involved mapping article characteristics and reviewing public health capacity building framework domains. Results. The search yielded 5731 records. A total of 43 articles met the study eligibility criteria. Articles were published in English, Spanish, French and Russian including diverse perspectives and experiences emanating from more than 20 countries in Africa, Europe, North America and South America. Most articles were formatted as commentaries. Only three reported methods or collected primary data. Articles topics included organizational structure, networks, research, funding, and governance. Conclusion. Findings reveal a longstanding international interest in leveraging NPHIs to address complex public health challenges. Lack of studies reporting methods reveals the need for future research to utilize quantitative and qualitative methods. The NPHI literature addresses topics concerning public health capacity building which underscores NPHIs’ ability to tackle global and national public health threats. Many articles in this review recommend investment in NPHIs as a strategy to respond to crises and strengthen countries’ public health systems.

IANPHI and National Public Health Institutes

More than one hundred countries around the world have established national public health institutes (NPHIs) to coordinate and lead their public health systems. Some NPHIs, such as the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), South African National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD), Brazilian Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), and Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, have developed over time. Others, such as the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), emanated in response to more recent global public health threats like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). NPHI functionalities range from combatting primarily infectious diseases to comprehensive mandates to lead national efforts for prevention and control of both infectious and noncommunicable disease threats. The International Association of National Public Health Institutes (IANPHI), envisioned in 2001 and chartered in 2006, serves to link and catalyze the capacity of NPHIs around the world through a robust international professional and scientific network. IANPHI works closely with the World Health Organization (WHO) through a formal partnership agreement. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, member dues and peer assistance, bilateral cooperative agreements, and private-sector partnerships support its activities. IANPHI’s members encompass more than five billion people across six continents. IANPHI is the only organization whose mission is to strengthen national public health institutes. To do this, IANPHI’s work focuses on (a) supporting a robust scientific community of NPHI directors through an annual meeting, a listserv, and collaborative activities; (b) developing and distributing guidelines and tools that strengthen NPHIs’ abilities to conduct and evaluate public health programs and efforts, including the IANPHI NPHI development framework, the Staged Development Tool, NPHI-to-NPHI evaluation guidance, and a best practices series; and (c) investing in projects designed to create NPHIs and strengthen public health systems in low-resource countries. IANPHI helps NPHIs by advocating for strong and well-supported NPHIs and providing timely information and insights for public health programs and actions.

Building operational public health capacity through collaborative networks of National Public Health Institutes

The strengthening of public health systems internationally is integral to the improvement and protection of global population health. Essential public health functions and services are provided for by a range of organisations working together, often co-ordinated and strategically led by national Ministries of Health. Increasingly, however, National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs) are being developed to better integrate and support the delivery of these services. In this paper, we outline the role of NPHIs, analyse their advantages and shortcomings, and explore their potential to deliver enhanced public health through collaborative networking as well as partnership with WHO.

Upsurge in echovirus 30 detections in five EU/EEA countries, April to September, 2018

An upsurge in Echovirus 30 (E30) infections, associated with meningitis/meningoencephalitis, has been observed in Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden in the period April to September 2018, compared with 2015–2017. In total, 658 E30 infections among 4,537 enterovirus infections were detected in 15 countries between January and September 2018 and affected mainly newborns and 26–45 year-olds. National public health institutes are reminded to remain vigilant and inform clinicians of the ongoing epidemic.