scholarly journals Development of a Public Health Preparedness Competency Model for EU Member States

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
MA Stoto ◽  
E Savoia ◽  
C Nelson ◽  
R Piltch-Loeb ◽  
S Guicciardi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Competency Model ◽  
Public Health Preparedness ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States

European Union Rights and Values in Human Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 16-51
Author(s):  
Anniek de Ruijter
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

This book looks at the impact of the expanding power of the EU in terms of fundamental rights and values. The current chapter lays down the framework for this analysis. Law did not always have a central role to play in the context of medicine and health. The role of law grew after the Second Word War and the Nuremberg Doctors Trials (1947), in which preventing the repetition of atrocities that were committed in the name of medicine became a guidepost for future law regarding patients’ rights and bioethics. In the period after the War, across the EU Member States, health law developed as a legal discipline in which a balance was struck in medicine and public health between law, bioethics, and fundamental rights. The role of EU fundamental rights protections in the context of public health and health care developed in relation with the growth of multilevel governance and litigation (national, international, Council of Europe, and European Union). For the analysis here, this chapter develops an EU rights and values framework that goes beyond the strictly legal and allows for a ‘normative language’ that takes into consideration fundamental rights as an expression of important shared values in the context of the European Union. The perspective of EU fundamental rights and values can demonstrate possible tensions caused by EU health policy: implications in terms of fundamental rights can show how highly sensitive national policy issues may be affected by the Member States’ participation in EU policymaking activities.

Public health preparedness and response competency model methodology

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Ablah, PhD, MPH ◽  
Elizabeth McGean Weist, MA, MPH, CPH ◽  
John E. McElligott, MPH, CPH ◽  
Laura A. Biesiadecki, MSPH, CPH ◽  
Audrey R. Gotsch, DrPH, MCHES ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Core Competency ◽  
Competency Model ◽  
National Standard ◽  
Public Health Workforce ◽  
Public Health Preparedness ◽  
Training And Education ◽  
The Public ◽  
Competency Models ◽  
Control And Prevention

Objective: The Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act calls for establishing a competency-based training program to train public health practitioners. To inform such training, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Schools of Public Health managed groups of experts to produce a competency model which could function as a national standard of behaviorally based, observable skills for the public health workforce to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from all hazards.Design: A systematic review of existing competency models generated a competency model of proposed domains and competencies.Participants: National stakeholders were engaged to obtain consensus through a three-stage Delphi-like process.Results: The Delphi-like process achieved 84 percent, 82 percent, and 79 percent response rates in its three stages. Three hundred sixty six unique individuals responded to the three-round process, with 45 percent (n = 166) responding to all three rounds. The resulting competency model features 18 competencies within four core learning domains targeted at midlevel public health workers.Conclusions: Practitioners and academics have adopted the Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model, some of whom have formed workgroups to develop curricula based on the model. Efforts will be needed to develop evaluation materials for training and education programs to refine the model as well as for future training and education initiatives.

scholarly journals EU ASYLUM SYSTEM IN AND AFTER THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: DISCLOSING THE WEAKNESSES OF THE CURRENT RULES AND ASSESSING THE PROSPECTS OF THE NEW PACT ON MIGRATION AND ASYLUM

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Čučković
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Current Phase ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Human Rights Standards ◽  
The Eu

The paper analyses the influence that the Covid-19 pandemic has had on the functioning of the European asylum system. The analysis is divided into three parts and addresses problematic issues associated with different stages of the pandemic. In the first part of the paper, the author outlines the asylum practices of EU Member States in the initial stage of the Covid-19 pandemic during which the pandemic was perceived as a state of emergency. By exploring the legal possibilities to derogate both from the EU asylum rules and international human rights standards, the author offers conclusions as regards limits of derogations and the legality of Member States’ practices, especially their failure to differentiate between rules that are susceptive of being derogated in emergency situations and those that are not. The second part of the paper analyses the current phase of the pandemic in which it is perceived as a 'new normal' and focuses on making the EU asylum system immune to Covid-19 influence to the greatest extent possible and in line with relevant EU and human rights rules. The author insists on the vulnerability as an inherent feature of persons in need of international protection and researches upon the relationship between the two competing interests involved – protection of asylum seekers and ensuring public health as a legitimate reason for restricting certain asylum seekers’ rights. The final part of the paper analyses the prospects of the future EU asylum system, as announced by the New Pact on Migration and Asylum in September 2020, to adapt to the exigencies of both the current Covid-19 crisis and pandemics that are yet to come. With an exclusive focus on referral to Covid-19 and provisions relevant for the current and future pandemics, the author criticizes several solutions included in the instruments that make up the Pact. It is concluded that the Pact failed to offer solutions for problems experienced during the Covid-19 pandemic and that, under the pretext of public health, it prioritizes the interests of Member States over the interests of applicants for international protection.

Balkan public distrust will endanger vaccine take-up

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Relative Safety ◽  
Balkan Countries ◽  
To Come ◽  
Clear Majority ◽  
The Eu

Significance Non-EU Balkan countries are lagging behind EU member states in securing access to vaccines. However, survey data show that a clear majority of citizens would refuse to accept a government-sanctioned vaccine, representing a possible risk to public health for years to come. Impacts Russia and China will try to boost their influence by offering their own vaccines more quickly and in quantity. The relative safety of Russian and Western vaccines will be an issue in Russian disinformation campaigns. The EU will lose ground in the geopolitical contest, with doses not available via the WHO-GAVI COVAX scheme until April.

scholarly journals The innovative use of health information in public health policy across EU-Member States

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Haneef ◽  
H Van Oyen ◽  
R Gaidelyte ◽  
O Zeynep ◽  
B Pérez-Gomez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Public Health Policy ◽  
Linked Data ◽  
Health Indicators ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Use Of Data

Abstract Background Health information systems both at the national and international level play a key role in ensuring that timely and reliable evidence is used for operational and strategic decision making inside and outside the health sector. The availability of data generated from different sources is increasing with the possibility to link these data sources together. However, more efficient data generation processes are required to use data collected for different purposes initially, as well as advanced statistical techniques to generate comparable and timely health information. The main objective is to explore the innovative use of health information for better public health policy across the Member States. Methods As part of InfAct, we have conducted as survey among EU-MS to describe the innovative use of data sources. We are collecting inspiring examples on the innovative use of health information based on national or European data networks involved with health policy-making at national, regional or local level. We are further developing generic methods to estimate health indicators using machine learning techniques and mathematical modelling. Results These approaches will generate a roadmap on the innovative use of health information across Member States, enlarge the existing list of health indicators estimated from linked data and/or advanced statistical techniques, inform on the implications of these indicators in health policy with inspiring examples from Member States, and provide methodological guidelines for using linked data and advanced statistics to estimate health indicators, and composite outcome measures. Conclusions This work will highlight the gaps in the innovative use of data sources, and improve the comparability of health indicators and the capacity of EU-Member states to apply innovation for increased relevance and timeliness of health information for public health policy-making.

scholarly journals THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON THE FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS IN THE EU

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dunja Duić ◽  
Veronika Sudar
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Political Legitimacy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The impact of the COVID-19 outbreak is being endured throughout the world, and the European Union (EU) is no exception. The rapid spreading of the virus effected, among other things, restriction on the freedom of movement. The EU member states introduced national response measures to contain the pandemic and protect public health. While broadly similar, the measures differ with regard to strictness and the manner of introduction, reflecting the political legitimacy of the respective country. With the ‘Guidelines concerning the exercise of the free movement of workers during COVID-19 outbreak’ – its first COVID-19-related Communication – the European Commission (EC) attempted to curb differing practices of the EU member states and ensure a coordinated approach. Ultimately, this action was aimed at upholding of fundamental rights as guaranteed to EU citizens, one such being the freedom of movement. Thus, from the very start of the pandemic, the coordinated actions of EU institutions sought to contain the spread of COVID-19 infections with the support and cooperation of EU member states. This is confirmed by the most recent Council of the EU (Council) recommendation on a coordinated approach to restrictions to freedom of movement within the EU of October 2020. While they did prevent the spread of infection and save countless lives, the movement restriction measures and the resulting uncertainty have greatly affected the people, the society, and the economy, thereby demonstrating that they cannot remain in force for an extended period. This paper examines the measures introduced by EU member states and analyses the legal basis for introducing therewith limitations on human rights and market freedoms. To what extent are the EU and member states authorized to introduce restrictions on the freedom of movement in the interest of public health? Have the EU and member states breached their obligations regarding market freedoms and fundamental rights under the Treaty? And most importantly: have they endangered the fundamental rights of the citizens of the EU?

scholarly journals Understanding the factors that contribute to the similarities and differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies across Europe

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Kamga ◽  
B Voordouw ◽  
M Koopmans ◽  
A Timen
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Public Health Laboratory ◽  
Laboratory Diagnostics ◽  
Testing Strategy ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Testing Strategies ◽  
Diagnostic Capacity

Abstract Background Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, the importance of testing suspected cases has been stressed by various governments and international organizations. Early in the pandemic, the WHO's Secretary General emphasized the need to ‘test, test, test'. Nonetheless, there were some evident differences between European Member States' testing strategies. In order to get an understanding of why and how these differences developed we conducted a mixed methods study in several EU member states. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 professionals with expertise in public health, laboratory diagnostics and policymaking in 8 European countries, namely Croatia, Italy, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Spain, Latvia, Italy, Slovenia. Based on interview results, a questionnaire is developed to quantify to which degree a larger audience of public health, laboratory and policy-making professionals believe identified factors played a role in the national SARS-CoV-2 testing strategy. Preliminary results 3 factors seem to play an important role in the diagnostic capacity and testing strategy. Firstly, differences in the countries' available stockpile and their ability to efficiently procure diagnostic equipment influenced testing strategies. Secondly, the variation in institutions that took ownership of the issues of developing, executing and developing the policies led to differences in the testing strategies. Lastly, all countries aimed to follow international advice and guidelines, which led to the convergence of testing strategies over time. Conclusions In order to be prepared for a pandemic of COVID-19's scale and make necessary adjustments in capacity building, it is important that Member States understand the factors that play an important role in both their own and other European countries' diagnostic preparedness strategies.

scholarly journals Overview of national health reporting in the EU and quality criteria for public health reports – results of the Joint Action InfAct

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Thissen ◽  
Stefanie Seeling ◽  
Peter Achterberg ◽  
Angela Fehr ◽  
Luigi Palmieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Health Reporting ◽  
Target Groups ◽  
Member States ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Reporting Practices ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Desk Research ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Background Health reporting shall provide up-to-date health-related data to inform policy-makers, researchers and the public. To this end, health reporting formats should be tailored to the needs and competencies of the target groups and provide comparable and high-quality information. Within the Joint Action on Health Information ‘InfAct’, we aimed at gaining an overview of health reporting practices in the EU Member States and associated countries, and developed quality criteria for the preparation of public health reports. The results are intended to facilitate making health information adequately available while reducing inequalities in health reporting across the EU. Methods A web-based desk research was conducted among EU Member States and associated countries to generate an overview of different formats of national health reporting and their respective target groups. To identify possible quality criteria for public health reports, an exploratory literature review was performed and earlier projects were analysed. The final set of criteria was developed in exchange with experts from the InfAct consortium. Results The web-based desk research showed that public health reports are the most frequently used format across countries (94%), most often addressed to scientists and researchers (51%), politicians and decision-makers (41%). However, across all reporting formats, the general public is the most frequently addressed target group. With regards to quality criteria for public health reports, the literature review has yielded few results. Therefore, two earlier projects served as main sources: the ‘Evaluation of National and Regional Public Health Reports’ and the guideline ‘Good Practice in Health Reporting‘from Germany. In collaboration with experts, quality criteria were identified and grouped into eight categories, ranging from topic selection to presentation of results, and compiled in a checklist for easy reference. Conclusion Health reporting practices in the EU are heterogeneous across Member States. The assembled quality criteria are intended to facilitate the preparation, dissemination and access to better comparable high-quality public health reports as a basis for evidence-based decision-making. A comprehensive conceptual and integrative approach that incorporates the policy perspective would be useful to investigate which dissemination strategies are the most suitable for specific requirements of the targeted groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document