Health Security最新文献

Hospital patient boarding in emergency departments has reached unprecedented crisis levels over the past 4 years. Boarding and crowding has been demonstrated by prior literature to have adverse effects on patient care as well as increased associated costs. Importantly, the increase in hospital patient boarding has created critical shortcomings in disaster preparedness by limiting the capacity of emergency departments to respond to mass casualty incidents due to space and staffing constraints. Multiple concurrent threats exacerbate these challenges, including increases in the incidence of both natural and unnatural disasters over the past decade and decreases in the numbers of US hospitals, hospital beds, and employed healthcare staff. "Emergency department boarding" must also be renamed "hospital boarding" given that the fundamental challenge lies with hospital and health system leadership and does not stem from emergency departments. In this commentary, the authors share a call to action to increase support and funding for research to alleviate the demands of hospital boarding, greater recognition among hospital leadership of the threat that hospital boarding poses to disaster scenarios, and widespread development of hospital-based, regional plans for mass casualty incident response that are more effective in the context of excessive boarding.

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the need for nations to prepare more effectively for emerging infectious diseases. Preparing for these threats requires a multifaceted approach that includes assessing pathogen threat, building flexible capabilities for rapid medical countermeasure (MCM) development, and exercising, maintaining, and improving those response capabilities. The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) promotes the advanced development of MCMs in response to natural and manmade threats. In this article, the authors describe a BARDA threat assessment tool that, in conjunction with other factors, facilitates portfolio management and decisionmaking related to the advanced development of MCMs for emerging infectious diseases. The tool was designed to use readily accessible public data and information related to the threat posed by pathogens. It can be adjusted to modify the specific areas of interest (eg, removal/addition of parameters) to facilitate cross-pathogen analysis and can be updated to reflect changes (eg, new outbreak) that may impact the overall threat assessment. Finally, assessment of certain pathogens is included.

In early 2020, to halt the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the state government of Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil established a public health assessment and response framework known as a "controlled distancing model." Using this framework, the government divided the state into 21 regions and evaluated them against a composite index of disease transmission and health service capacity. Regions were assessed using a color-coded scale of flags that was updated on a weekly basis and used to guide the adoption of nonpharmaceutical interventions. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the extent to which the controlled distancing model accurately assessed transmission and the effectiveness of its responses throughout 2020. We estimated the weekly effective reproduction number (R_t) of SARS-CoV-2 for each region using a renewal equation-based statistical model of notified COVID-19 deaths. Using R_t estimates, we explored whether flag colors assigned by the controlled distancing model either reflected or affected SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Results showed that flag assignments did reflect variations in R_t to a limited extent, but we found no evidence that they affected R_t in the short term. Medium-term effects were apparent in only 4 regions after 8 or more weeks of red flag assignment. Analysis of Google movement metrics showed no evidence that people moved differently under different flags. The dissociation between flag colors and the propagation of SARS-CoV-2 does not call into question the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical interventions. Our results show, however, that decisions made under the controlled distancing model framework were ineffective both at influencing the movement of people and halting the spread of the virus.

This case study describes findings from an exercise conducted in April 2023 to assess the readiness of the National Quarantine Unit (NQU) and identify opportunities for improvement. The exercise is part of a multiyear effort to assess the readiness of quarantine and transport capabilities at the NQU through annual workshops, discussion-based exercises, and functional and full-scale exercises. The April 2023 exercise tested interagency coordination and decisionmaking, transport of individuals for monitoring, quarantine unit operations, and escalation of care for symptomatic individuals out of quarantine to high-level isolation units in the United States. Findings showed that collaboration and engagement of local, state, and national organizations increases awareness of novel and emerging high-consequence infectious disease pathogens and enhances capabilities and capacity for patient transport. It also improves timely and efficient diagnostic testing and increases the availability of dedicated assets to support activation and mobilization of the NQU, the Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Center network, and the future national special pathogen system of care. Given the changing landscape of emerging special pathogens, an objective evaluation of the state of readiness is an essential element of preparedness and response.

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) in addressing global health emergencies. This review aims to improve healthcare system capabilities, future preparedness, and actions in the Eastern Mediterranean Region, particularly in low-resource areas. The IHR, established in 1969, initially focused on 6 diseases but has since expanded to include a wider range of public health threats. These regulations establish a globally recognized legal framework that is applicable to all 196 states parties, including all 194 World Health Organization member states. The IHR prioritize the prevention, protection, and control of global disease transmission while minimizing unwarranted disruptions to international travel and commerce. Nonetheless, the response to COVID-19 in the Eastern Mediterranean Region revealed a range of deficiencies despite the regulatory strengths. Some countries encountered challenges in fully complying with their IHR obligations, particularly in terms of preparedness, and occasional geopolitical tensions obstructed international collaboration. The pandemic experience underscores the need for improved trust, resource allocation, and regulatory revisions to address upcoming global health challenges. This case study highlights positive aspects of the pandemic response, including the swift exchange of information and global cooperation, while also recognizing shortcomings, such as delays in reporting and unequal vaccine access. In summary, the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the urgency of subsequent updates to the IHR or comparable accords, such as the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty, to rectify these deficiencies. Updates should place a greater emphasis on transparency, cultivating trust, enhancing preparedness, and establishing mechanisms that incentivize comprehensive compliance among all participating nations.

High-level isolation units (HLIUs) are facilities strategically outfitted to receive patients with suspected or confirmed high-consequence infectious diseases (HCIDs). Although most HCID outbreaks occur in low- and middle-income countries, global travel and migration and the deployment of healthcare workers to global outbreaks have led to the occurrence of HCIDs in high-income countries that requires the activation of an HLIU. Despite the existence of HLIUs worldwide, there has been little collaboration between units at the international level. This study reviews the results of a descriptive survey of global HLIUs conducted between December 2022 and February 2023. The purpose of the survey was to identify traits and attributes of global HLIU peers to determine commonalities and differences among the units, identify priorities for increased networking, and inform future activities among global partners. Findings from this survey demonstrate the array of similarities and differences among HLIUs across the globe, indicate potential areas of further investigation, and identify areas in which alignment could be improved and global standards could be created.