Bulletin of the World Health Organization最新文献

Julie Makani talks to Gary Humphreys about the need for guidance and policy to reflect developments in treatment of sickle cell disease.

Objective: To compare uptake of the voluntary Health Star Rating front-of-pack nutrition labelling system with uptake of a mostly mandatory country-of-origin label in Australia over a similar period.

Methods: We used data on numbers and proportions of products carrying health stars and country-of-origin labelling recorded annually between 2015 and 2023 through surveys of four large Australian food retailers. We determined the proportion of products with health stars and country-of-origin labels for each year by dividing the number of products carrying each label by the total number eligible to carry that label.

Findings: The uptake of the voluntary Health Star Rating increased steadily between 2014 and 2018, reaching a maximum of 42% (8587/20 286) of products in 2021 before decreasing to 39% (8572/22 147) in 2023. Mandatory country-of-origin labelling uptake rose rapidly and was found on 93% (17 567/18 923) of products in 2023. In categories where country-of-origin labelling was voluntary, uptake by 2023 was 48% (3313/6925). In our 2023 sample of 22 147 products, 11 055 (50%) carried country-of-origin labelling only, 7466 (35%) carried both health star and country-of-origin labelling, 1106 (5%) carried health star labels only and 2520 (11%) carried neither label.

Conclusion: The experience with country-of-origin labelling shows that widespread and rapid food labelling change can be achieved when required by law. The Australian government should mandate the Health Star Rating without delay. Australia's experience supports other jurisdictions in implementing mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling as well as updates to global guidance to recognize mandatory labelling as best-practice in delivering benefits to consumers.

In recent decades, considerable advances have been made in assuring the safety of blood transfusion and organ transplantation. However, with the increasing movement of medical products of human origin across international boundaries, there is a need to enhance global norms and governance. These products, which include blood, organs, tissues, cells, human milk and faecal microbiota, are today crucial for health care but they also pose unique risks due to their human origin, such as disease transmission and graft failure. Moreover, the demand for medical products of human origin often exceeds supply, leading to dependence on international supply chains, and emerging technologies like cell and gene therapy present further challenges because of their unproven efficacy and long-term risks. Current regulatory mechanisms, especially in low- and middle-income countries, are insufficient. The World Health Organization (WHO) has both the mandate and experience to lead the development of international quality and safety standards, consistent product nomenclature, and robust traceability and biovigilance systems. An international, multistakeholder approach is critical for addressing the complexities of how medical products of human origin are used globally and for ensuring their safety. This approach will require promoting uniform product descriptions, enhancing digital communication systems and leveraging existing resources to support countries in establishing regulations for these products. As illustrated by World Health Assembly resolution WHA77.4 on transplantation in 2024, WHO's ongoing efforts to ensure the safe, efficient and ethical use of medical products of human origin worldwide provide the opportunity to galvanize international cooperation on establishing norms.

Objective: To develop a framework and index for measuring universal health coverage (UHC) at the district level in India and to assess progress towards UHC in the districts.

Methods: We adapted the framework of the World Health Organization and World Bank to develop a district-level UHC index (UHC _d ). We used routinely collected health survey and programme data in India to calculate UHC _d for 687 districts from geometric means of 24 tracer indicators in five tracer domains: reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health; infectious diseases; noncommunicable diseases; service capacity and access; and financial risk protection. UHC _d is on a scale of 0% to 100%, with higher scores indicating better performance. We also assessed the degree of inequality within districts using a subset of 14 tracer indicators. The disadvantaged subgroups were based on four inequality dimensions: wealth quintile, urban-rural location, religion and social group.

Findings: The median UHC _d was 43.9% (range: 26.4 to 69.4). Substantial geographical differences existed, with districts in southern states having higher UHC _d than elsewhere in India. Service coverage indicator levels were greater than 60%, except for noncommunicable diseases and for service capacity and access. Health insurance coverage was limited, with about 10% of the population facing catastrophic and impoverishing health expenditure. Substantial wealth-based disparities in UHC were seen within districts.

Conclusion: Our study shows that UHC can be measured at the local level and can help national and subnational government develop prioritization frameworks by identifying health-care delivery and geographic hotspots where limited progress towards UHC is being made.