scholarly journals The public health benefits of urban sanitation in low and middle income countries

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 82-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandy Cairncross
Author(s):  
Katja Siefken ◽  
Andrea Varela Ramirez ◽  
Temo Waqanivalu ◽  
Nico Schulenkorf

Since 2020, the world has been navigating an epidemiologic transition with both infectious diseases (COVID-19) and noncommunicable diseases intertwined in complex and diverse ways. In fact, the pandemics of physical inactivity, noncommunicable diseases, and COVID-19 coincide in a tragically impactful ménage à trois with their detrimental long-term health consequences yet to be determined. We know that people in low- and middle-income countries not only have the highest risk of developing chronic diseases, they also develop the diseases at a younger age, they suffer longer, and they die earlier than people in high-income countries. This commentary features 5 compelling reasons for putting physical activity in low- and middle-income countries high up on the public health research agenda and calls for more commitment to inclusive and context-specific public health practices that are paired with locally relevant promotion and facilitation of PA practice, research, and policymaking.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Objectives To discuss the added value of locally developed health policies and strategies in the context of Global Sustainable Development Goals. To discuss the capabilities, opportunities and limitations of public health institutes in low- and middle-income countries in contributing to health policies and strategies in their countries vis-à-vis the global policies, promoted by multilateral and UN institutions. To formulate recommendations for strengthening the role of local health research institutions in low- and middle-income countries in formulating evidence-based policies and strategies for achieving Sustainable Development Goals, in their countries and beyond their borders. Five panellists from public health and research institutes in Bangladesh, Laos, DR Congo, Uganda and Haiti, and one representative from the European Commission, discuss their experiences in the Support to Public Health Institutes Programme (financed by the European Union), and what they have achieved in influencing policy and practice. Have they been able to leave their ivory tower of science, and have they been able to enter into real dialogue with politicians, practitioners and users of health services? How have they dealt with scepticism in the era mistrust in science? How did they bridge the gap between science and politics, and what tangible products did they deliver to make an impact on health of the population through policy advice or strategy formulation? Did they really make a difference and if yes, how? How did the public health institutes relate to the global giants in health policy and strategies? Did they get support or encouragement for following a local route? Have the public health institutes been able to contribute to global development? Has an international exchange facilitated by the European Commission contributed to strengthening the institutes? After short introductions by the panelists about their work in the last five years, there will be answers to questions from the panel leader and the delegates in the workshop. Delegates are invited to share experiences from their countries. Most of the time of the workshop will be used for a discussion among all participants in the workshop: how can public health institutes and research institutions play a stronger role in policy advice and strategy development in the health sector in their country? What should change within the institutions? How can they demonstrate their added value? What should change in ministries of health and parliaments? What should change in decision-makers in health services? Which best practices do we know, can serve as an example? At the end of the workshop the participants will formulate concrete recommendations, to be presented to the global health community. Key messages Public health institutes and research institutions in low- and middle-income countries have a hidden potential to contribute to local solutions for global health problems. A paradigm shift in relations between academic institutions is needed to unleash the potential of public health institutes.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajiv Chowdhury ◽  
Shammi Luhar ◽  
Nusrat Khan ◽  
Sohel Reza Choudhury ◽  
Imran Matin ◽  
...  

To limit the social, economic and psychological damage caused by strict social distancing interventions, many low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are seeking to ease restrictions. However, it is unknown what a ‘safe reopening’ entails in LMICs given suboptimal diagnostic and surveillance capabilities. Here we discuss three community-based public health measures (sustained mitigation, zonal lockdown and dynamic rolling lockdowns) which seek to adequately balance the public health and economic priorities. Each of these options have limitations and prerequisites that may be context-specific and should be considered before implementation, including implementation and maintenance costs, social and economic costs, context-specific epidemic growth and the existing health resources.


Author(s):  
Chris Bullen ◽  
Jessica McCormack ◽  
Amanda Calder ◽  
Varsha Parag ◽  
Kannan Subramaniam ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare worldwide. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where people may have limited access to affordable quality care, the COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to have a particularly adverse impact on the health and healthcare of individuals with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). A World Health Organization survey found that disruption of delivery of healthcare for NCDs was more significant in LMICs than in high-income countries. However, the study did not elicit insights into the day-to-day impacts of COVID-19 on healthcare by front-line healthcare workers (FLHCWs). Aim: To gain insights directly from FLHCWs working in countries with a high NCD burden, and thereby identify opportunities to improve the provision of healthcare during the current pandemic and in future healthcare emergencies. Methods: We recruited selected frontline healthcare workers (general practitioners, pharmacists, and other medical specialists) from nine countries to complete an online survey (n = 1347). Survey questions focused on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practice and NCDs; barriers to clinical care during the pandemic; and innovative responses to the many challenges presented by the pandemic. Findings: The majority of FLHCWs responding to our survey reported that their care of patients had been impacted both adversely and positively by the public health measures imposed. Most FLHCs (95%) reported a deterioration in the mental health of their patients. Conclusions: Continuity of care for NCDs as part of pandemic preparedness is needed so that chronic conditions are not exacerbated by public health measures and the direct impacts of the pandemic.


2017 ◽  
Vol 211 (5) ◽  
pp. 264-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. S. Jacob

SummarySuicide, a common cause of death in many low- and middle-income countries, has often been viewed through a medical/psychiatric lens. Such perspectives medicalise social and personal distress and suggest individual and medication-based treatments. This editorial argues for the need to examine suicide from a public health perspective and suggests the need for population-based social and economic interventions.


Author(s):  
Christopher B. Raymond ◽  
Paul R. Ward

(1) Background: COVID-19 disruptions offer researchers insight into how pandemics are at once biological and social threats, as communities struggle to construct meaning from novel challenges to their ontological status quo. Multiple epistemes, in which public health imperatives confront and negotiate locally derived knowledge and traditions, vie for legitimacy and agency, resulting in new cultural forms. (2) Methods: To investigate the context and construction of community responses, a systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted with the aim of evaluating those insights provided by empirical, social field research in low- and middle-income countries since the onset of COVID-19. Six scholarly databases were searched for empirical, qualitative, field-based, or participatory research that was published in peer-reviewed journals between December 2019 and August 2021. (3) Results: Twenty-five studies were selected for data extraction, following critical appraisal for methodological rigor by two independent reviewers, and were then analyzed thematically. Faced with unprecedented social ruptures, restrictions in social and physical mobility, and ever-looming uncertainties of infection, financial insecurity, stigma, and loss, communities worldwide reacted in multiple and complex ways. Pervasive misinformation and fear of social rejection resulted in noncompliance with pandemic sanctions, resistance, and increased isolation, allowing the spread of the disease. The meaning of, and understandings about, COVID-19 were constructed using traditional, religious, and biomedical epistemologies, which were occasionally in conflict with each other. Innovations and adaptations, through syntheses of traditional and biomedical discourses and practice, illustrated community resilience and provided models for successful engagement to improve public health outcomes. (4) Conclusion: Local context and community engagement were indispensable considerations when enacting effective public health interventions to meet the challenges of the pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document