scholarly journals Towards defining core principles of public health emergency preparedness: scoping review and Delphi consultation among European Union country experts

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelien Belfroid ◽  
Dorothee Roβkamp ◽  
Graham Fraser ◽  
Corien Swaan ◽  
Aura Timen
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
National Level ◽  
European Union Country ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Preparedness Planning ◽  
Consensus Procedure ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness

Abstract Background European Member States, the European Commission and its agencies work together to enhance preparedness and response for serious cross-border threats to health such as Ebola. Yet, common understanding of public health emergency preparedness across EU/EEA countries is challenging, because preparedness is a relatively new field of activity and is inherently fraught with uncertainty. A set of practical, widely accepted and easy to use recommendations for generic preparedness that bundles the activities described in separate guidance documents supports countries in preparing for any possible health threat. The aim of this consensus procedure was to identify and seek consensus from national-level preparedness experts from EU/EEA countries on key recommendations of public health emergency preparedness. Methods To identify key recommendations and to prioritize the recommendations we started with a literature consensus procedure, followed by a modified Delphi method for consultation of public health emergency preparedness leaders of EU/EEA countries. This consisted of six consecutive steps: a questionnaire to achieve consensus on a core set of recommendations, a face-to-face consultation, preselection of prioritized recommendations, a questionnaire to achieve consensus on the prioritized set and a face-to-face consensus meeting to further prioritize recommendations. Results As a result, EU/EEA experts selected 149 recommendations as core preparedness principles and prioritized 42. The recommendations were grouped in the seven domains: governance (57), capacity building and maintenance (11), surveillance (19), risk-assessment (16), risk- and crisis management (35), post-event evaluation (6) and implementation of lessons learned (5). Conclusions This prioritised set of consensus principles can provide a foundation for countries aiming to evaluate and improve their preparedness for public health emergencies. The recommendations are practical, support generic preparedness planning, and can be used by all countries irrespective of their current level of preparedness.

scholarly journals Public Health Emergency Preparedness Exercises: Lessons Learned

2010 ◽  
Vol 125 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 100-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Biddinger ◽  
Elena Savoia ◽  
Sarah B. Massin-Short ◽  
Jessica Preston ◽  
Michael A. Stoto
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness

scholarly journals Development of a public health emergency preparedness competency model for European Union countries

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (49) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Stoto ◽  
Elena Savoia ◽  
Christopher Nelson ◽  
Rachael Piltch-Loeb ◽  
Stefano Guicciardi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
National Level ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Competency Model ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Training Programmes

In 2017, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) developed a competency model for individuals who work in public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) in European Union (EU) countries. The model serves as the basis for developing competency-based training programmes to support professionals in PHEP efforts at the country level. The competency model describes the knowledge and skills professionals need when working in national-level PHEP, such as preparedness committee members or their equivalents. In order to develop the model, existing competency statements were reviewed, as well as case studies and reports. Fifty-three professionals from the EU and other countries provided feedback to the model by participating in a three-stage consultation process. The model includes 102 competency, 100 knowledge and 158 skill statements. In addition to specifying the appropriate content for training programmes, the proposed common competency model can help to standardise terminology and approaches to PHEP training.

scholarly journals 18.H. Workshop: Bringing evidence during public health emergencies: addressing the challenge through HTA

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Emergency Preparedness And Response ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and irrefutable evidence may be lacking. The process of including evidence in public health decision-making and for evidence-informed policy, in preparation, and during public health emergencies, is not systematic and is complicated by many barriers as the absences of shared tools and approaches for evidence-based preparedness and response planning. Many of today's public health crises are also cross-border, and countries need to collaborate in a systematic and standardized way in order to enhance interoperability and to implement coordinated evidence-based response plans. To strengthen the impact of scientific evidence on decision-making for public health emergency preparedness and response, it is necessary to better define mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies and the context in which these mechanisms operate. As a multidisciplinary, standardized and evidence-based decision-making tool, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) represents and approach that can inform public health emergency preparedness and response planning processes; it can also provide meaningful insights on existing preparedness structures, working as bridge between scientists and decision-makers, easing knowledge transition and translation to ensure that evidence is effectively integrated into decision-making contexts. HTA can address the link between scientific evidence and decision-making in public health emergencies, and overcome the key challenges faced by public health experts when advising decision makers, including strengthening and accelerating knowledge transfer through rapid HTA, improving networking between actors and disciplines. It may allow a 360° perspective, providing a comprehensive view to decision-making in preparation and during public health emergencies. The objective of the workshop is to explore and present how HTA can be used as a shared and systematic evidence-based tool for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response, in order to enable stakeholders and decision makers taking actions based on the best available evidence through a process which is systematic and transparent. Key messages There are many barriers and no shared mechanisms to bring evidence in decision-making during public health emergencies. HTA can represent the tool to bring evidence-informed actions in public health emergency preparedness and response.

scholarly journals From Anthrax to Zika: Fifteen Years of Public Health Emergency Preparedness

2017 ◽  
Vol 107 (S2) ◽  
pp. S117-S117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Nonkin Avchen ◽  
Tanya Telfair LeBlanc ◽  
Christine Kosmos
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document