保护和维持受冲突影响地区平民健康的医疗服务:非洲局势的比较分析

J. Mavole
{"title":"保护和维持受冲突影响地区平民健康的医疗服务:非洲局势的比较分析","authors":"J. Mavole","doi":"10.47672/ejhs.1507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpsoe: Medical neutrality refers to a globally accepted principle derived from International humanitarian law (IHL), International Human Rights Law and Medical Ethics. It is based on the principles of non-interference with medical services in times of armed conflict and civil unrest. It promotes the freedom for physicians and aid personnel to care for the sick and wounded, and to receive care regardless of political affiliation. The purpose of this study was to examine comparatively, the extent in which humanitarian aid access, healthcare facilities and healthcare professionals are protected in conflict affected areas in Africa. The protection of health personnel, health services and humanitarian workers is no longer respected. This compromises the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 – towards health for all, and 16 – towards justice and peace. \nMethdology: The study was guided by Andersen’s Behavioral Model of health service of 1995. Methodological wise, the study was depended on desktop review of empirical research including the works of Ramadan (2020) on availability of primary healthcare services in conflict affected areas as well as the works of Altare et al (2020) on the experience of women, children and adolescents in conflicts affected areas among others. \nFindings: The findings show that, limited infrastructure, lack of skilled personnel, and shortages of essential medical supplies hinder access to healthcare services, creating a significant gap in humanitarian aid for civilians in these areas. The study also reveals the vulnerability of health facilities and healthcare workers to attacks during conflicts, emphasizing the need for enhanced protection measures. Destruction of communication infrastructure and disrupted transportation further impede the functioning of health facilities and the delivery of critical services. The study underscores the limited access to humanitarian aid, the need for greater protection of health facilities, and the challenges in safeguarding healthcare professionals in conflict affected areas in Africa. \nRecommendations: The study recommends prioritization of the protection of health facilities and healthcare professionals, enhanced security measures, advocacy for International Humanitarian Law (IHL), support for healthcare infrastructure, improved access to healthcare, facilitation of humanitarian aid, support for peacebuilding initiatives and strengthening of monitoring and accountability by African Nations. \n ","PeriodicalId":224837,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Sciences","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protection and Maintenance of Healthcare Services for Civilians’ Well-Being in Conflict Affected Areas: Comparative Analysis of The African Situation\",\"authors\":\"J. Mavole\",\"doi\":\"10.47672/ejhs.1507\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpsoe: Medical neutrality refers to a globally accepted principle derived from International humanitarian law (IHL), International Human Rights Law and Medical Ethics. It is based on the principles of non-interference with medical services in times of armed conflict and civil unrest. It promotes the freedom for physicians and aid personnel to care for the sick and wounded, and to receive care regardless of political affiliation. The purpose of this study was to examine comparatively, the extent in which humanitarian aid access, healthcare facilities and healthcare professionals are protected in conflict affected areas in Africa. The protection of health personnel, health services and humanitarian workers is no longer respected. This compromises the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 – towards health for all, and 16 – towards justice and peace. \\nMethdology: The study was guided by Andersen’s Behavioral Model of health service of 1995. Methodological wise, the study was depended on desktop review of empirical research including the works of Ramadan (2020) on availability of primary healthcare services in conflict affected areas as well as the works of Altare et al (2020) on the experience of women, children and adolescents in conflicts affected areas among others. \\nFindings: The findings show that, limited infrastructure, lack of skilled personnel, and shortages of essential medical supplies hinder access to healthcare services, creating a significant gap in humanitarian aid for civilians in these areas. The study also reveals the vulnerability of health facilities and healthcare workers to attacks during conflicts, emphasizing the need for enhanced protection measures. Destruction of communication infrastructure and disrupted transportation further impede the functioning of health facilities and the delivery of critical services. The study underscores the limited access to humanitarian aid, the need for greater protection of health facilities, and the challenges in safeguarding healthcare professionals in conflict affected areas in Africa. \\nRecommendations: The study recommends prioritization of the protection of health facilities and healthcare professionals, enhanced security measures, advocacy for International Humanitarian Law (IHL), support for healthcare infrastructure, improved access to healthcare, facilitation of humanitarian aid, support for peacebuilding initiatives and strengthening of monitoring and accountability by African Nations. \\n \",\"PeriodicalId\":224837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Health Sciences\",\"volume\":\"160 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47672/ejhs.1507\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ejhs.1507","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:医学中立是指从国际人道主义法、国际人权法和医学伦理中衍生出来的一项全球公认的原则。它的基础是在武装冲突和内乱期间不干涉医疗服务的原则。它促进医生和援助人员照顾伤病员的自由,并不分政治派别地接受照顾。本研究的目的是比较考察在非洲受冲突影响地区,人道主义援助通道、医疗设施和医疗专业人员受到保护的程度。对保健人员、保健服务和人道主义工作者的保护不再受到尊重。这不利于实现联合国可持续发展目标3(实现人人享有卫生保健)和目标16(实现正义与和平)。方法:本研究以Andersen 1995年卫生服务行为模型为指导。在方法方面,该研究依赖于对实证研究的桌面审查,包括Ramadan(2020年)关于受冲突影响地区初级保健服务可获得性的研究成果,以及Altare等人(2020年)关于受冲突影响地区妇女、儿童和青少年经验的研究成果。调查结果:调查结果表明,基础设施有限、缺乏熟练人员和基本医疗用品短缺阻碍了获得保健服务,造成这些地区平民在人道主义援助方面存在巨大差距。该研究还揭示了卫生设施和卫生保健工作者在冲突期间容易受到攻击的情况,强调需要加强保护措施。通信基础设施的破坏和交通的中断进一步阻碍了卫生设施的运作和关键服务的提供。该研究强调了获得人道主义援助的机会有限,需要加强对卫生设施的保护,以及在非洲受冲突影响地区保护卫生保健专业人员方面面临的挑战。建议:该研究建议优先保护卫生设施和卫生保健专业人员,加强安全措施,倡导国际人道法,支持卫生保健基础设施,改善获得卫生保健的机会,促进人道主义援助,支持建设和平倡议,加强非洲国家的监测和问责制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Protection and Maintenance of Healthcare Services for Civilians’ Well-Being in Conflict Affected Areas: Comparative Analysis of The African Situation
Purpsoe: Medical neutrality refers to a globally accepted principle derived from International humanitarian law (IHL), International Human Rights Law and Medical Ethics. It is based on the principles of non-interference with medical services in times of armed conflict and civil unrest. It promotes the freedom for physicians and aid personnel to care for the sick and wounded, and to receive care regardless of political affiliation. The purpose of this study was to examine comparatively, the extent in which humanitarian aid access, healthcare facilities and healthcare professionals are protected in conflict affected areas in Africa. The protection of health personnel, health services and humanitarian workers is no longer respected. This compromises the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 – towards health for all, and 16 – towards justice and peace. Methdology: The study was guided by Andersen’s Behavioral Model of health service of 1995. Methodological wise, the study was depended on desktop review of empirical research including the works of Ramadan (2020) on availability of primary healthcare services in conflict affected areas as well as the works of Altare et al (2020) on the experience of women, children and adolescents in conflicts affected areas among others. Findings: The findings show that, limited infrastructure, lack of skilled personnel, and shortages of essential medical supplies hinder access to healthcare services, creating a significant gap in humanitarian aid for civilians in these areas. The study also reveals the vulnerability of health facilities and healthcare workers to attacks during conflicts, emphasizing the need for enhanced protection measures. Destruction of communication infrastructure and disrupted transportation further impede the functioning of health facilities and the delivery of critical services. The study underscores the limited access to humanitarian aid, the need for greater protection of health facilities, and the challenges in safeguarding healthcare professionals in conflict affected areas in Africa. Recommendations: The study recommends prioritization of the protection of health facilities and healthcare professionals, enhanced security measures, advocacy for International Humanitarian Law (IHL), support for healthcare infrastructure, improved access to healthcare, facilitation of humanitarian aid, support for peacebuilding initiatives and strengthening of monitoring and accountability by African Nations.  
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信