Health Security最新文献

The New South Wales Biocontainment Centre is a statewide referral facility for patients with high-consequence infectious disease (HCID). The facility collaborates with researchers to adapt existing HCID procedures such as donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE). However, information on how to respond safely to collapse of a healthcare provider in full PPE within a contaminated zone is scarce. To address this gap, we adapted Nebraska Medicine's "provider down" protocol on paper and then simulated and video recorded the process, iteratively, in the facility. Clinicians analyzed the recordings collaboratively in researcher-facilitated reflexive discussions. Our primary aim was to ascertain how to maintain optimal infection prevention and control while providing urgent care for the healthcare provider. We tested participants' suggested modifications, in repeated video recorded simulations, until consensus on optimal practice was achieved. Our secondary aim was to assess the utility of video-reflexive methods to enhance clinicians' awareness and understanding of infection prevention and control in a rare and complex scenario. Six adaptations and simulations were discussed in video-reflexive sessions before consensus was reached; the final version of the protocol differed considerably from the first. Viewing footage of simulations in situ enabled participants to (1) identify infection and occupational risks not identified on paper or during verbal postsimulation debriefs and (2) test alternative perspectives on safe procedure. Video-reflexivity enables context-sensitive and consensus-building codesign of policies and procedures, critical to protocol development in a new unit. It contributes to a culture of teamwork, preparedness, and confidence before, rather than in the heat of, a crisis.

Although first aid research is a wide-ranging and diverse field within medical science, so far no attempts have been made to provide a holistic view of international scientific outputs in the first aid domain. To determine strategic directions for conducting future studies, it is important to understand the status of the research, including its frontiers and blind spots. This study explored the global landscape of first aid research using bibliometric visualization analysis of relevant literature published within the last 20 years. The search yielded a total of 2,057 relevant papers. There was a trend of increasing annual numbers of publications throughout the 20 year period. The following topics were identified as the mainstream directions of first aid research: cross-sectional studies on attitudes and knowledge of first aid; cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation; bleeding and hemorrhage control; burns, scalds, and their management; envenomations and their management; and systematic evaluation of the scientific evidence. Evidence evaluation is one of the main frontiers of first aid research. Studies concerning first aid for the most common and deadliest diseases, including myocardial infarction and stroke, are not in the scope of contemporary international first aid research. Considering that effective implementation of first aid can reduce morbidity and mortality, it is advisable to advance research on first aid management of major emergencies that are the most common potentially avoidable causes of death.

High-level isolation units (HLIUs) have been established by countries to provide safe and optimal medical care for patients with high-consequence infectious diseases. We aimed to identify global high-level isolation capabilities and determine gaps and priorities of global HLIUs, using a multiple method approach that included a systematic review of published and gray literature and a review of Joint External Evaluations and Global Health Security Index reports from 112 countries. A follow-up electronic survey was distributed to identified HLIUs. The landscape analysis found 44 previously designated/self-described HLIUs in 19 countries. An additional 33 countries had potential HLIUs; however, there were not enough details on capabilities to determine if they fit the HLIU definition. An electronic survey was distributed to 36 HLIUs to validate landscape analysis findings and to understand challenges, best practices, and priorities for increased networking with a global HLIU cohort; 31 (86%) HLIUs responded. Responses revealed an additional 30 confirmed HLIUs that were not identified in the landscape analysis. To our knowledge, this was the first mapping and the largest ever survey of global HLIUs. Survey findings identified major gaps in visibility of HLIUs: while our landscape analysis initially identified 44 units, the survey unveiled an additional 30 HLIUs that had not been previously identified or confirmed. The lack of formalized regional or global coordinating organizations exacerbates these visibility gaps. The unique characteristics and capabilities of these facilities, coupled with the likelihood these units serve as core components of national health security plans, provides an opportunity for increased connection and networking to advance the field of high-level isolation and address identified gaps in coordination, build an evidence base for HLIU approaches, and inform HLIU definitions and key components.

The Sudan virus disease outbreak in 2022 prompted the Denver Health High-Risk Infection Team (HITeam) to evaluate and implement novel strategies to respond to viral hemorrhagic fever (VHF) events. To improve the VHF response, HITeam members developed a virtual assessment model (VAM) for at-home evaluation of individuals who are suspected of having a VHF. The VAM incorporates aspects of care that would normally be rendered in a high-level isolation unit-including assessment and monitoring, specimen collection, provider consultation, patient and family teaching, and pharmaceutical intervention-into a mobile framework in which team members respond to a suspected case at the individual's home. Building this capability allows for more thorough assessment of a suspect case in the field, as well as the postponement of a decision about activation of the high-level isolation unit until more information is available. Development, testing, and implementation of the VAM required input from an interdisciplinary group of partners that demonstrated the ability of nurses, physicians, laboratorians, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, and public health personnel to integrate into 1 cohesive care team. The resulting model recenters VHF care on the patient by allowing the care team to gather critical information in an environment that is more comfortable for the suspect case while keeping communities safe and lowering exposure risks. The VAM has long-term sustainability implications for global VHF programs and provides solutions for broader challenges in healthcare by modeling cost-effective, patient-centered care within the highly nuanced subspecialty of special pathogen care.

This case study describes the experience of the German Permanent Working Group of Competence and Treatment Centers for High Consequence Infectious Diseases, known as STAKOB (Ständiger Arbeitskreis der Kompetenz- und Behandlungszentren für Krankheiten durch hochpathogene Erreger). STAKOB brings together public health authorities (competence centers) and high-level isolation units (treatment centers) to collaborate on the clinical management of high-consequence infectious diseases (HCIDs) and emerging infectious diseases. The network is coordinated by the Robert Koch Institute, Germany's federal public health institute. The main tasks of STAKOB are to strengthen HCID clinical and public health management and increase expert knowledge on HCID and non-HCID emerging infectious diseases in Germany. STAKOB enables the exchange of knowledge and experiences; development of guidelines on infection prevention and control measures, clinical management, and therapy; and support for the World Health Organization and other outbreak responses internationally. The past years have shown how important the STAKOB network is for Germany-not only in providing critical care for HCID cases but also increasing capacity to support public health and clinical management of emerging infectious disease cases. However, maintaining several high-level isolation units in Germany requires a high commitment of financial, material, and human resources. Due to the rarity of HCID and emerging infectious disease events, maintaining the appropriate level of preparedness and ensuring sufficient investments is an ongoing struggle. Nevertheless, it is essential to have a network ready to react to HCID and non-HCID emerging infectious diseases in times of a changing biosecurity and infectious landscape.

Developing and sustaining relationships and networks before an emergency occurs is crucial. The Biocontainment Unit Leadership Workgroup is a consortium of the 13 Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Centers in the United States. Established in 2017, the volunteer-based workgroup is composed of operational leaders dedicated to maintaining readiness for special pathogen care. Monthly meetings focus on addressing operational challenges, sharing best practices, and brainstorming solutions to common problems. Task forces are leveraged to tackle more complex issues that are identified as priorities. In 2022, members of the workgroup were harnessed for response efforts related to mpox, Sudan ebolavirus, and Marburg virus disease. The weekly Outbreak Readiness call is a shared effort between the Biocontainment Unit Leadership Workgroup and the Special Pathogens Research Network of the National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center. Call participants included leaders of the Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Centers and federal partners who shared weekly updates on operational readiness of units, case counts, laboratory capacity, available medical countermeasures, and other pertinent information. The routine exchange of real-time information enabled learning and collegial sharing of experiences, highlighted the experience of the network to federal partners, and provided situational awareness of special pathogen outbreaks across the country. The consortium enabled this rapid convening of partners to meet an urgent need for special pathogen response. The weekly Outbreak Readiness call is a communication model and scalable framework that serves both domestic preparedness efforts and international efforts should the need for a collaborative global response arise. In this case study, we describe the framework and experience of this partnership, along with the structure of rapid deployment for group convening.

An organizational culture of biosafety and biosecurity is critical for effective management of transboundary animal diseases. One essential aspect of this work is keeping important pathogens studied in veterinary laboratories under control. Türkiye is among the countries that are both endemic and disease-free for foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) virus, and it has a unique institute dedicated to FMD diagnosis, control, and vaccine production. To build an organizational safety culture within this institute and strengthen awareness of the importance of safe and secure handling of FMD, 4 staff members previously trained in biorisk management developed and provided trainings to all institute staff. The institute's 173 personnel were divided into 3 groups by job description based on direct or indirect work with FMD virus. All 3 groups received training that addressed biosecurity, biosafety, biorisk awareness, and insider threat; the trainings varied in length by group. Three-quarters (n=130, 75%) of all institute staff completed their training and were asked to complete knowledge surveys using a Likert scale survey before and after their training. A majority (n=104, 80%) of those participants completed both the pretraining and posttraining surveys. All 3 training groups' posttraining surveys showed improved awareness above baseline scores, and all 3 groups scores reached the targeted threshold goal. Group 2 demonstrated a realization that some of the knowledge and habits they had acquired through experience were incorrect. Scores for several individual questions decreased at posttraining, and these results will need further evaluation. The overall training results prompted the institute to provide periodic updates to employees to sustain the organizational safety culture. With this study, the institute now has a dedicated group of biorisk management representatives. This work serves as a wake-up call for established institutions that rely on staff experience to foster an organizational culture of biosafety and biosecurity.

The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Guidance Framework for the Responsible Use of the Life Sciences addresses the governance of biorisks, including dual-use research, for countries. It emphasizes engaging multisectoral stakeholders such as governments, scientific bodies, health and research institutes, standard-setting organizations, funding bodies, and others. Ethics constitutes a key component of the framework. Given the high social impact of such research and the importance of trust, risk, and benefit, national ethics committees could make a valuable contribution by providing ethical guidance in the decisionmaking process. The purpose of this study was to examine the role of national ethics committees in the context of governance and oversight of dual-use research at the national level. We conducted a landscape analysis of the activities of ethics committees in dual-use research oversight. We also searched the WHO database on National Ethics Committees for publications related to dual-use research and/or misuse of life sciences research and gathered additional documentation from national ethics committees websites and through author contacts. Results showed that in the context of the wide range of oversight mechanisms for dual-use research in countries, national ethics committees have contributed to guiding policy and assessing dual-use research risks in only a limited number of countries. Recommendations from those countries include establishing a multistakeholder, coordinated oversight mechanism at the country level; strengthening international linkages to guide, harmonize, and reinforce national and international efforts; and involving ethics committees as an expert resource in the governance and oversight process.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, violence targeting healthcare reportedly increased. Attacks against healthcare can severely hamper the public health response during a pandemic. Descriptive data analysis of these attacks may be helpful to develop prevention and mitigation strategies. This study aimed to investigate trends regarding COVID-19-related attacks against healthcare from January 2020 until January 2023. COVID-19-related incidents occurring between January 2020 and January 2023 were extracted from the Safeguarding Health in Conflict Coalition database and screened for eligibility. Included incidents were linked to COVID-19 health measures or were attacks directly interfering with COVID-19 healthcare, including conflict-related attacks. Data collected per incident included temporal factors; country; setting; attack and weapon type; perpetrator; motive; number of healthcare workers (HCWs) killed, injured, or kidnapped; and health facility damage. The study identified 255 COVID-19-related attacks against healthcare, with 18 HCWs killed, 147 HCWs injured, and 86 facilities damaged. The highest attack frequency was reported during the beginning of the pandemic and predominantly concerned stigma-related attacks against healthcare. Reported incidents in 2021 included attacks targeting vaccination campaigns, as well as conflict-related attacks interfering with COVID-19 healthcare. COVID-19-related attacks against healthcare occurred in heterogeneous contexts throughout the pandemic. Due to underreporting, the data presented are a minimum estimate of the actual magnitude of violence. The findings of this study emphasize the importance of public education campaigns, improved coordination between healthcare organizations and law enforcement, and the possible need to bolster the security of medical facilities and health workers.