定义和确定突发公共卫生事件行动准备的关键要素:快速范围审查。

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
René English, Heather Carlson, Heike Geduld, Juliet Charity Yauka Nyasulu, Quinette Louw, Karina Berner, Maria Yvonne Charumbira, Michele Pappin, Michael McCaul, Conran Joseph, Nina Gobat, Linda Lucy Boulanger, Nedret Emiroglu
{"title":"定义和确定突发公共卫生事件行动准备的关键要素:快速范围审查。","authors":"René English, Heather Carlson, Heike Geduld, Juliet Charity Yauka Nyasulu, Quinette Louw, Karina Berner, Maria Yvonne Charumbira, Michele Pappin, Michael McCaul, Conran Joseph, Nina Gobat, Linda Lucy Boulanger, Nedret Emiroglu","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>COVID-19 showed that countries must strengthen their operational readiness (OPR) capabilities to respond to an imminent pandemic threat rapidly and proactively. We conducted a rapid scoping evidence review to understand the definition and critical elements of OPR against five core sub-systems of a new framework to strengthen the global architecture for Health Emergency Preparedness Response and Resilience (HEPR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, targeted repositories, websites, and grey literature databases for publications between 1 January 2010 and 29 September 2021 in English, German, French or Afrikaans. Included sources were of any study design, reporting OPR, defined as immediate actions taken in the presence of an imminent threat, from groups who led or responded to a specified health emergency. We used prespecified and tested methods to screen and select sources, extract data, assess credibility and analyse results against the HEPR framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 7005 sources reviewed, 79 met the eligibility criteria, including 54 peer-reviewed publications. The majority were descriptive reports (28%) and qualitative analyses (30%) from early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Definitions of OPR varied while nine articles explicitly used the term 'readiness', others classified OPR as part of preparedness or response. Applying our working OPR definition across all sources, we identified OPR actions within all five HEPR subsystems. These included resource prepositioning for early detection, data sharing, tailored communication and interventions, augmented staffing, timely supply procurement, availability and strategic dissemination of medical countermeasures, leadership, comprehensive risk assessment and resource allocation supported by relevant legislation. We identified gaps related to OPR for research and technology-enabled manufacturing platforms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>OPR is in an early stage of adoption. Establishing a consistent and explicit framework for OPRs within the context of existing global legal and policy frameworks can foster coherence and guide evidence-based policy and practice improvements in health emergency management.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"9 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367384/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining and identifying the critical elements of operational readiness for public health emergency events: a rapid scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"René English, Heather Carlson, Heike Geduld, Juliet Charity Yauka Nyasulu, Quinette Louw, Karina Berner, Maria Yvonne Charumbira, Michele Pappin, Michael McCaul, Conran Joseph, Nina Gobat, Linda Lucy Boulanger, Nedret Emiroglu\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>COVID-19 showed that countries must strengthen their operational readiness (OPR) capabilities to respond to an imminent pandemic threat rapidly and proactively. We conducted a rapid scoping evidence review to understand the definition and critical elements of OPR against five core sub-systems of a new framework to strengthen the global architecture for Health Emergency Preparedness Response and Resilience (HEPR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, targeted repositories, websites, and grey literature databases for publications between 1 January 2010 and 29 September 2021 in English, German, French or Afrikaans. Included sources were of any study design, reporting OPR, defined as immediate actions taken in the presence of an imminent threat, from groups who led or responded to a specified health emergency. We used prespecified and tested methods to screen and select sources, extract data, assess credibility and analyse results against the HEPR framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 7005 sources reviewed, 79 met the eligibility criteria, including 54 peer-reviewed publications. The majority were descriptive reports (28%) and qualitative analyses (30%) from early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Definitions of OPR varied while nine articles explicitly used the term 'readiness', others classified OPR as part of preparedness or response. Applying our working OPR definition across all sources, we identified OPR actions within all five HEPR subsystems. These included resource prepositioning for early detection, data sharing, tailored communication and interventions, augmented staffing, timely supply procurement, availability and strategic dissemination of medical countermeasures, leadership, comprehensive risk assessment and resource allocation supported by relevant legislation. We identified gaps related to OPR for research and technology-enabled manufacturing platforms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>OPR is in an early stage of adoption. Establishing a consistent and explicit framework for OPRs within the context of existing global legal and policy frameworks can foster coherence and guide evidence-based policy and practice improvements in health emergency management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"9 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367384/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014379\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014379","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:COVID-19 表明,各国必须加强其行动准备(OPR)能力,以迅速、主动地应对迫在眉睫的流行病威胁。我们进行了一次快速范围证据审查,以便根据新框架的五个核心子系统了解行动准备的定义和关键要素,从而加强全球卫生应急准备响应和复原力(HEPR)架构:我们在 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Web of Science、目标资料库、网站和灰色文献数据库中检索了 2010 年 1 月 1 日至 2021 年 9 月 29 日期间用英语、德语、法语或南非荷兰语发表的出版物。所纳入的资料来源包括任何研究设计、报告 OPR(定义为在面临迫在眉睫的威胁时立即采取的行动)的文章,这些文章来自领导或应对特定卫生紧急情况的团体。我们使用预先规定并经过测试的方法筛选资料来源、提取数据、评估可信度,并根据 HEPR 框架分析结果:在审查的 7005 篇资料中,有 79 篇符合资格标准,其中包括 54 篇经同行评审的出版物。大部分是 COVID-19 大流行早期阶段的描述性报告(28%)和定性分析(30%)。OPR 的定义各不相同,有 9 篇文章明确使用了 "准备 "一词,其他文章则将 OPR 归为准备或响应的一部分。我们在所有资料来源中应用了 OPR 的工作定义,确定了所有五个 HEPR 子系统中的 OPR 行动。这些行动包括早期检测的资源预置、数据共享、有针对性的沟通和干预、增强人员配置、及时采购供应、医疗对策的可用性和战略传播、领导力、全面风险评估以及相关立法支持下的资源分配。我们发现了与研究和技术制造平台的 OPR 有关的差距:OPR 尚处于早期采用阶段。在现有的全球法律和政策框架内为 OPR 建立一个一致而明确的框架,可以促进一致性,并指导卫生应急管理中以证据为基础的政策和实践改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Defining and identifying the critical elements of operational readiness for public health emergency events: a rapid scoping review.

Introduction: COVID-19 showed that countries must strengthen their operational readiness (OPR) capabilities to respond to an imminent pandemic threat rapidly and proactively. We conducted a rapid scoping evidence review to understand the definition and critical elements of OPR against five core sub-systems of a new framework to strengthen the global architecture for Health Emergency Preparedness Response and Resilience (HEPR).

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, targeted repositories, websites, and grey literature databases for publications between 1 January 2010 and 29 September 2021 in English, German, French or Afrikaans. Included sources were of any study design, reporting OPR, defined as immediate actions taken in the presence of an imminent threat, from groups who led or responded to a specified health emergency. We used prespecified and tested methods to screen and select sources, extract data, assess credibility and analyse results against the HEPR framework.

Results: Of 7005 sources reviewed, 79 met the eligibility criteria, including 54 peer-reviewed publications. The majority were descriptive reports (28%) and qualitative analyses (30%) from early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Definitions of OPR varied while nine articles explicitly used the term 'readiness', others classified OPR as part of preparedness or response. Applying our working OPR definition across all sources, we identified OPR actions within all five HEPR subsystems. These included resource prepositioning for early detection, data sharing, tailored communication and interventions, augmented staffing, timely supply procurement, availability and strategic dissemination of medical countermeasures, leadership, comprehensive risk assessment and resource allocation supported by relevant legislation. We identified gaps related to OPR for research and technology-enabled manufacturing platforms.

Conclusions: OPR is in an early stage of adoption. Establishing a consistent and explicit framework for OPRs within the context of existing global legal and policy frameworks can foster coherence and guide evidence-based policy and practice improvements in health emergency management.

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
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
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