scholarly journals Global Public Health Surveillance under New International Health Regulations

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 1058-1065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G. Baker ◽  
David P. Fidler
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Health Surveillance ◽  
International Health ◽  
Health Surveillance ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Health Regulations

The New International Health Regulations: Considerations for Global Public Health Surveillance

2007 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica L. Sturtevant ◽  
Aranka Anema ◽  
John S. Brownstein
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Public Health Surveillance ◽  
International Health ◽  
Health Surveillance ◽  
Surveillance Systems ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Health Regulations

ABSTRACTGlobal public health surveillance is critical for the identification and prevention of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases. The World Health Organization recently released revised International Health Regulations (IHR) that serve as global legislation and provide guidelines for surveillance systems. The IHR aim to identify and prevent spread of these infectious diseases; however, there are some practical challenges that limit the usability of these regulations. IHR requires Member States to build necessary infrastructure for global surveillance, which may not be possible in underdeveloped countries. A large degree of freedom is given to each individual government and therefore different levels of reporting are common, with substantial emphasis on passive reporting. The IHR need to be enforceable and enforced without impinging on government autonomy or human rights. Unstable governments and developing countries require increased assistance in setting up and maintaining surveillance systems. This article addresses some challenges and potential solutions to the ability of national governments to adhere to the global health surveillance requirements detailed in the IHR. The authors review some practical challenges such as inadequate surveillance and reporting infrastructure, and legal enforcement and maintenance of individual human rights. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2007;1:117–121)

scholarly journals Capacity of Public Health Surveillance to Comply with Revised International Health Regulations, USA

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 804-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kia E. Armstrong ◽  
Scott J. N. McNabb ◽  
Lisa D. Ferland ◽  
Tim Stephens ◽  
Anna Muldoon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Health Surveillance ◽  
International Health ◽  
Health Surveillance ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Health Regulations

Synergising International Public Health Law and International Disaster Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Pratik DIXIT
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
International Health ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Public Health Law ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Response Strategies ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
International Public Health ◽  
Health Regulations

There is no time more opportune to review the workings of the International Health Regulations (IHR) than the present COVID-19 crisis. This article analyses the theoretical and practical aspects of international public health law (IPHL), particularly the IHR, to argue that it is woefully unprepared to protect human rights in times of a global public health crisis. To rectify this, the article argues that the IHR should design effective risk reduction and response strategies by incorporating concepts from international disaster law (IDL). Along similar lines, this article suggests that IDL also has a lot to learn from IPHL in terms of greater internationalisation and institutionalisation. Institutionalisation of IDL on par with IPHL will provide it with greater legitimacy, transparency and accountability. This article argues that greater cross-pollination of ideas between IDL and IPHL is necessary in order to make these disciplines more relevant for the future.

scholarly journals The Maritime Declaration of Health (MDH) as a tool to detect maritime traffic-related health risks: analysis of MDH forms submitted to Spanish ports, October 2014 to March 2015

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (24) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosa M López-Gigosos ◽  
Marina Segura ◽  
Rosa M Díez-Díaz ◽  
Isabel Ureña ◽  
David Urzay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Risks ◽  
International Health ◽  
P Value ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Maritime Traffic ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Passenger Ships ◽  
Health Regulations

The international maritime traffic of people and goods has often contributed to the spread of pathogens affecting public health. The Maritime Declaration of Health (MDH), according to the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005), is a document containing data related to the state of health on board a ship during passage and on arrival at port. It is a useful tool for early detection of public health risks. The main objective of our study was to evaluate compliance with the model provided in the IHR, focusing on the format and degree of completion of MDH forms received at Spanish ports. We reviewed the content of 802 MDH forms submitted to nine Spanish ports between October 2014 and March 2015. Study results show that 22% of MDH forms presented did not comply with the recommended model and 39% were incomplete. The proportion of cargo ships with correct and complete MDH forms was lower than passenger ships; thus, the nine health questions were answered less frequently by cargo ships than passenger ships (63% vs 90%, p value < 0.001). The appropriate demand and usage of MDH forms by competent authorities should improve the quality of the document as a tool and improve risk assessment.

scholarly journals Strengthening public health laboratory capacity in Thailand for International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005)

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 266 ◽  
Author(s):  
AnneHarwood Peruski ◽  
Maureen Birmingham ◽  
Chawalit Tantinimitkul ◽  
Ladawan Chungsamanukool ◽  
Preecha Chungsamanukool ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
International Health ◽  
Public Health Laboratory ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Laboratory Capacity ◽  
Health Regulations

scholarly journals An analysis of International Health Regulations Emergency Committees and Public Health Emergency of International Concern Designations

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. e002502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Mullen ◽  
Christina Potter ◽  
Lawrence O Gostin ◽  
Anita Cicero ◽  
Jennifer B Nuzzo
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Ebola Virus ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
International Health ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Director General ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
International Response ◽  
Health Regulations

IntroductionNine events have been assessed for potential declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). A PHEIC is defined as an extraordinary event that constitutes a public health risk to other states through international spread and requires a coordinated international response. The WHO Director-General convenes Emergency Committees (ECs) to provide their advice on whether an event constitutes a PHEIC. The EC rationales have been criticised for being non-transparent and contradictory to the International Health Regulations (IHR). This first comprehensive analysis of EC rationale provides recommendations to increase clarity of EC decisions which will strengthen the IHR and WHO’s legitimacy in future outbreaks.Methods66 EC statements were reviewed from nine public health outbreaks of influenza A, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, polio, Ebola virus disease, Zika, yellow fever and coronavirus disease-2019. Statements were analysed to determine which of the three IHR criteria were noted as contributing towards the EC’s justification on whether to declare a PHEIC and what language was used to explain the decision.ResultsInterpretation of the criteria were often vague and applied inconsistently. ECs often failed to describe and justify which criteria had been satisfied.DiscussionGuidelines must be developed for the standardised interpretation of IHR core criteria. The ECs must clearly identify and justify which criteria have contributed to their rationale for or against PHEIC declaration.ConclusionStriving for more consistency and transparency in EC justifications would benefit future deliberations and provide more understanding and support for the process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document