Background: COVID-19 is disproportionately affecting disadvantaged populations, with greater representation and worse outcomes in low socioeconomic and minority populations, and in persons from marginalized groups. General health care system approaches to inequity reduction (i.e., the minimization of differences in health and health care which are considered unfair or unjust), address the major social determinants of health, such as low income, ethnic affiliation or remote place of residents. Yet, to effectively reduce inequity there is a need for a multifactorial consideration of the aspects that intersect and generate significant barriers to effective care that can address the unique situations that people face due to their gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic situation.
Main body: To address the health equity challenges of diverse population groups in Israel, we propose to adopt an intersectional approach, allowing to better identify the needs and then better tailor the infection prevention and control modalities to those who need them the most. We focus on the two main ethnic - cultural-religious minority groups, that of Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel and Jewish ultra-orthodox (Haredi) communities. Additionally, we address the unique needs of persons with severe mental illness who often experience an intersection of clinical and sociodemographic risks.
Conclusions: This perspective highlights the need for responses to COVID-19, and future pandemic or global disasters, that adopt the unique lens of intersectionality and equity. This requires that the government and health system create multiple messages, interventions and policies which ensure a person and community tailored approach to meet the needs of persons from diverse linguistic, ethnic, religious, socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. Under-investment in intersectional responses will lead to widening of gaps and a disproportionate disease and mortality burden on societies' most vulnerable groups.
Background: Policy makers need to maintain public trust in healthcare systems in order to foster citizen engagement in recommended behaviors and treatments. The importance of such commitment has been highlighted by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Central to public trust is the extent of the accountability of health authorities held responsible for long-term effects of past treatments. This paper addresses the topic of manifestations of trust among patients damaged by radiation treatments for ringworm.
Methods: For this mixed-methods case study (quan/qual), we sampled 600 files of Israeli patients submitting claims to the National Center for Compensation of Scalp Ringworm Victims in the years 1995-2014, following damage from radiation treatments received between 1946 and 1960 in Israel and/or abroad. Qualitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, and correlations were analyzed with chi-square tests. Verbal data were analyzed by the use of systematic content analysis.
Results: Among 527 patients whose files were included in the final analysis, 42% held authorities responsible. Assigning responsibility to authorities was more prevalent among claimants born in Israel than among those born and treated abroad (χ2 = 6.613, df = 1, p = 0.01), claimants reporting trauma (χ2 = 4.864, df = 1, p = 0.027), and claimants living in central cities compared with those in suburban areas (χ2 = 18.859, df = 6, p < 0.01). Men, younger claimants, patients with a psychiatric diagnosis, and patients from minority populations expressed mistrust in health regulators.
Conclusions: Examining populations' perceived trust in healthcare institutions and tailoring health messages to vulnerable populations can promote public trust in healthcare systems.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic evolved through five phases, beginning with 'the great threat', then moving through 'the emergence of variants', 'vaccines euphoria', and 'the disillusionment', and culminating in 'a disease we can live with'. Each phase required a different governance response. With the progress of the pandemic, data were collected, evidence was created, and health technology was developed and disseminated. Policymaking shifted from protecting the population by limiting infections with non-pharmaceutical interventions to controlling the pandemic by prevention of severe disease with vaccines and drugs for those infected. Once the vaccine became available, the state started devolving the responsibility for the individual's health and behavior.
Main body: Each phase of the pandemic posed new and unique dilemmas for policymakers, which resulted in unprecedented decision-making. Restrictions to individual's rights such as a lockdown or the 'Green Pass policy' were unimaginable before the pandemic. One of the most striking decisions that the Ministry of Health made was approving the third (booster) vaccine dose in Israel, before it was approved by the FDA or any other country. It was possible to make an informed, evidence-based decision due to the availability of reliable and timely data. Transparent communication with the public probably promoted adherence to the booster dose recommendation. The boosters made an important contribution to public health, even though their uptake was less than the uptake for the initial doses. The decision to approve the booster illustrates seven key lessons from the pandemic: health technology is key; leadership is crucial (both political and professional); a single body should coordinate the actions of all stakeholders involved in the response, and these should collaborate closely; policymakers need to engage the public and win their trust and compliance; data are essential to build a suitable response; and nations and international organizations should collaborate in preparing for and responding to pandemics, because viruses travel without borders.
Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic posed many dilemmas for policymakers. The lessons learned from the actions taken to deal with them should be incorporated into preparedness for future challenges.
Background: There are ongoing changes around the world in the training and practice of pediatricians who work in the community. These changes are driven by the understanding that pediatricians are required to provide not only acute primary care but also to address more comprehensive concerns, particularly the 'new morbidities'. The present study examines the professional identity of Israeli pediatricians in the community in light of these changes, the barriers and challenges to their work and professional adaptations in the field.
Methods: We used a mixed-methods approach, collecting the perspectives of 137 pediatricians who work in the community through an anonymous online survey, followed by in-depth semi-structured interviews with 11 community pediatricians.
Results: The survey results show that community pediatricians in Israel have limited knowledge on a variety of developmental, behavioral and emotional issues; that they lack working relationships with medical or other professionals; and are rarely engaged with other community services. Three main themes arose from the interviews that support and deepen the survey results: perceptions of the profession (pediatrics in the community vs. community pediatrics), the stature of pediatricians in the community (during residency, the choice to work in the community, their daily work) and barriers and change in community pediatrics (isolation, limited resources and challenges arising from the nature of community work).
Conclusions: The present study sheds light on the professional identity and the day-to-day challenges and successes of pediatricians working in the community. Continuing medical education, providing a supportive framework and professional community, better resources, more time with patients, and tools and opportunities for professional development would help pediatricians who work in the community to overcome some of these challenges. The research findings reinforce the need for policy change in the field of community pediatrics with a specific community training curriculum, provision of more resources and ongoing support for pediatricians. This requires partnership between the HMOs, the Ministry of Health, the Scientific Council (Israel Medical Association, professional organizations) and NGOs in order to turn individual-level solutions into system-level and policy-changing solutions.
In the paper published recently in this journal, Kumar et al. explained why the key to improved COVID-19 vaccine uptake is to understand societal reactions leading to vaccine hesitancy. They conclude that communications strategies should be tailored to the different phases of vaccine hesitancy. However, within the theoretical framework provided in their paper, vaccine hesitancy should be recognized as having both rational and irrational components. Rational vaccine hesitancy is a natural result of the inherent uncertainties in the potential impact of vaccines in controlling the pandemic. In general, irrational hesitancy is based on baseless information obtained from hearsay and deliberately false information. Risk communication should address both with transparent, evidence-based information. Rational concerns can be allayed by sharing the process in which dilemmas and uncertainties are dealt with by the health authorities. Messages on irrational concerns need to address head on the sources spreading unscientific and unsound information. In both cases, there is a need to develop risk communication that restores trust in the health authorities.
Evidence-informed decision-making is increasingly recognized as a standard for policymaking in many fields, including public health. However, many challenges exist in identifying the appropriate evidence, disseminating it to different stakeholders, and implementing it in various settings. The Israel Implementation Science and Policy Engagement Centre (IS-PEC) was established at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev to "bridge the gap" between scientific research and policy. As an illustrative case study, IS-PEC is conducting a scoping review on strategies to engage senior citizens in Israel when developing health policy. In May 2022, IS-PEC brought together international experts and Israeli stakeholders to increase knowledge in the field of evidence-informed policy, develop a research agenda, strengthen international collaborations, and create a community for sharing experience, research, and best practices. Panelists presented the importance of communicating clear, accurate bottom-line messages with the media. Also, they highlighted the once-in-a-generation opportunity to promote the uptake of evidence in public health due to the increased public interest in evidence-informed policymaking post-COVID-19 pandemic and the need to build systems and centers to support the systematic use of evidence. Group discussions focused on various aspects of communication, including challenges and strategies when communicating to policymakers, understanding the nuances of communication between scientists, journalists, and the public, and some ethical issues surrounding data visualization and infographics. Panelists participated in a passionate debate regarding whether and how values play a role when conducting, analyzing, and communicating evidence. Takeaway lessons from the workshop included that going forward, Israel must create lasting systems and a sustainable environment for evidence-informed policy. Novel and interdisciplinary academic programs must be developed to train future policymakers in various fields, including public health, public policy, ethics, communication, social marketing, and infographics. Sustainable professional relationships between journalists, scientists, and policymakers must be fostered and strengthened based on mutual respect and a shared commitment to creating, synthesizing, implementing, and communicating high-quality evidence to serve the public and individual wellbeing.
Background: In the last twenty years, there was a documented increase in prescription opioid procurement in Israel. However, there is still little evidence of the association between opioid procurement rates, health service utilisation in secondary care, and enrollment rates to substance use disorder treatment programmes. In this study, we show trends in the reports of opioid-related hospitalisations, emergency department visits, enrollment to community-based outpatient treatment for Prescription Opioid Use Disorder and opioid-related mortality rates. Additionally, we examine potential correlations between these health service utilisation rates and prescription opioid procurement rates at the population level, with a focus on transdermal fentanyl.
Methods: A longitudinal study at the population level. We used seven-year data on indicators of opioid-related morbidity, prescription opioid procurement data for 2015-2021, and six-year opioid-related mortality data for 2015-2020. We measure the correlation between procurement rates of prescription opioids in Oral Morphine Equivalent per capita, and aggregated rates obtained from hospital administrative data for hospitalisations, emergency department visits, and patient enrolment in specialised prescription opioid use disorder outpatient treatment in the community setting.
Results: Between 2015 and 2021, procurement rates in primary care per capita for all prescription opioids increased by 85%, while rates of transdermal fentanyl procurement increased by 162%. We found a significant positive correlation at the population level, between annual opioid procurement rates, and rates per population of opioid-related visits to emergency departments (r = 0.96, p value < 0.01, [CI 0.74-0.99]), as well as a positive correlation with the rates per population of patient enrolment in specialised prescription opioid use disorder outpatient treatment (r = 0.93, p value = 0.02, [CI 0.58-0.99]). Opioid-related mortality peaked in 2019 at 0.31 deaths per 100,000 but decreased to 0.20 deaths per 100,000 in 2020.
Conclusion: Data shows that all-opioid and transdermal fentanyl procurement has increased yearly between 2015 and 2021. This increase is positively correlated with a growing demand for community-based Prescription Opioid Use Disorder outpatient treatment. Efforts to reduce opioid-related morbidity may require effective approaches toward appropriate prescribing, monitoring, and further increasing access to prescription opioid outpatient treatment.
Background: The Israeli physician workforce faces multiple challenges. These include planned policies reducing physician on-call from 26 to 18 h and, from 2026, allowing only graduates of Ministry of Health approved foreign medical schools to take the Israeli licensing examination and an ongoing physician shortage (2019: Israel had 3.19 physicians/1000 persons vs. OECD average of 3.49 physicians/1000 persons). This study examines the potential impact of these planned policies on the Israeli anesthesiology workforce.
Methods: Surveys conducted among 34 public and private Israeli hospital anesthesiology department chairs collected data on their department's number of weekday on-call anesthesiologists and current shortage of anesthesiologists. A subsequent survey collected data on each anesthesiologist in the workforce, including the country where they studied medicine.
Results: Each weekday night there were 114 on-call anesthesiologists; 72 residents and 42 attendings. Using productive work coefficients, this translates to 104 resident and 51 attending anesthesiologists. Furthermore, 21 departments had existing anesthesia workforce shortages totaling 110 anesthesiologists. There were 873 anesthesiologists from non-OECD countries whose medical schools are not accredited by the World Federation for Medical Education, of whom 332 were residents (61.9% of residents). Only 20.1% of anesthesiology residents were Israeli medical school graduates.
Conclusions: Descriptive survey data assessed the immediate and long-term consequences for the healthcare system and anesthesiology workforce of two new Health Ministry policies. Implementing the 18-h policy will immediately remove from the daytime workforce 155 anesthesiologists and who will be unavailable to staff elective surgery operating rooms. This will compound the current national shortage of 110 anesthesiologists. It is unclear how to replace this shortfall since there are no surplus Israeli physicians and very few Israeli graduates choose anesthesiology as a specialty. This situation will be exacerbated after 2026 when graduates of certain foreign medical schools will be unable to enter the medical workforce, further reducing the pool of potential anesthesiology residents. Both policies were promulgated without adequate operational and budgetary planning or fiscal or workforce resources; implementation of the 18-h on-call policy has already been postponed. Therefore, new or updated policies must be accompanied by specific operational plans, budgetary allocations and funds for additional workforce.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：