Action-Based Costing for National Action Plans for Health Security: Accelerating Progress Toward the International Health Regulations (2005)

Pandemic preparedness and response: exploring the role of universal health coverage within the global health security architecture

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, several international initiatives have been developed to strengthen and reform the global architecture for pandemic preparedness and response, including proposals for a pandemic treaty, a Pandemic Fund, and mechanisms for equitable access to medical countermeasures. These initiatives seek to make use of crucial lessons gleaned from the ongoing pandemic by addressing gaps in health security and traditional public health functions. However, there has been insufficient consideration of the vital role of universal health coverage in sustainably mitigating outbreaks, and the importance of robust primary health care in equitably and efficiently safeguarding communities from future health threats. The international community should not repeat the mistakes of past health security efforts that ultimately contributed to the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and disproportionately affected vulnerable and marginalised populations, especially by overlooking the importance of coherent, multisectoral health systems. This Health Policy paper outlines major (although often neglected) gaps in pandemic preparedness and response, which are applicable to broader health emergency preparedness and response efforts, and identifies opportunities to reconceptualise health security by scaling up universal health coverage. We then offer a comprehensive set of recommendations to help inform the development of key pandemic preparedness and response proposals across three themes-governance, financing, and supporting initiatives. By identifying approaches that simultaneously strengthen health systems through global health security and universal health coverage, we aim to provide tangible solutions that equitably meet the needs of all communities while ensuring resilience to future pandemic threats.

The costs of improving health emergency preparedness: A systematic review and analysis of multi-country studies

BACKGROUND

Investing in health emergency preparedness is critical to the safety, welfare and stability of communities and countries worldwide. Despite the global push to increase investments, questions remain around how much should be spent and what to focus on. We conducted a systematic review and analysis of studies that costed improvements to health emergency preparedness to help to answer these questions.

METHODS

We searched for studies that estimated the costs of improving health emergency preparedness and that were published between 1 January 2000 and 14 May 2021, using PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, EconLit, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Databases (PROSPERO CRD42021254428). We also searched grey literature repositories and contacted subject experts. We included studies that estimated the costs of improving preparedness at the global level and/or at the national level across at least ten countries, covered two or more technical areas in the WHO Benchmarks for International Health Regulations (IHR) Capacities, and included activities focused on human health. We mapped costs across technical areas in the WHO Benchmarks for IHR Capacities.

FINDINGS

Ten studies met our inclusion criteria. Costing methods varied substantially across included studies and cost estimates ranged from US$1·6 billion per year to improve capacities across 139 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to US$43 billion per year to support national-level activities worldwide and implement global-level initiatives, such as research and development for health technologies (diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines). Two recent studies estimated costs by drawing on IHR Monitoring and Evaluation Framework country capacity data, with one study estimating costs across 67 LMICs of US$15·4 billion per year (US$29·1 billion including upfront capital costs) and the other calculating costs for the 196 States Parties to the IHR of US$24·8 billion per year. Differences in included studies' methods, and the characteristics of countries considered, mean it is difficult to make like-for-like comparisons of the absolute costs or per-capita costs estimated by studies.

INTERPRETATION

Improving health emergency preparedness worldwide will require substantial and sustained increases in investments. Further guidance on estimating the size of those investments can help to standardise methods, allowing greater interpretation and comparison across studies/countries. As well as greater transparency and detail in the reporting of methods by studies focused on this topic, this can help support estimates of global resource requirements and facilitate investments towards improving preparedness for future pandemics.

FUNDING

None.

Reviewing Health Security Capacities in Nigeria Using the Updated WHO Joint External Evaluation and WHO Benchmarks Tool: Experience from a Country-Led Self-Assessment Exercise

Across the world, the level of pandemic preparedness varies and no country is fully prepared to respond to all public health events. The International Health Regulations 2005 require state parties to develop core capacities to prevent, detect, and respond to public health events of international concern. In addition to annual self-assessment, these capacities are peer reviewed once every 5 years through the voluntary Joint External Evaluation (JEE). In this article, we share Nigeria's experience of conducting a country-led midterm self-assessment using a slightly modified application of the second edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) JEE and the new WHO benchmarks tool. Despite more stringent scoring criteria in the revised JEE tool, average scoring showed modest capacity improvements in 2019 compared with 2017. Of the 19 technical areas assessed, 11 improved, 5 did not change, and 3 had lower scores. No technical area attained the highest-level scoring of 5. Understanding the level of, and gaps in, pandemic preparedness enables state parties to develop plans to improve health security; the outcome of the assessment included the development of a 12-month operational plan. Countries need to intentionally invest in preparedness by using existing frameworks (eg, JEE) to better understand the status of their preparedness. This will ensure ownership of developed plans with shared responsibilities by all key stakeholders across all levels of government.

Investing in global health security: Estimating cost requirements for country-level capacity building

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted critical gaps in global capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious diseases. To effectively allocate investments that address these gaps, it is first necessary to quantify the extent of the need, evaluate the types of resources and activities that require additional support, and engage the global community in ongoing assessment, planning, and implementation. Which investments are needed, where, to strengthen health security? This work aims to estimate costs to strengthen country-level health security, globally and identify associated cost drivers. The cost of building public health capacity is estimated based on investments needed, per country, to progress towards the benchmarks identified by the World Health Organization's Joint External Evaluation (JEE). For each country, costs are estimated to progress to a score of "demonstrated capacity" (4) across indicators. Over five years, an estimated US$124 billion is needed to reach "demonstrated capacity" on each indicator of the JEE for each of the 196 States Parties to the International Health Regulations (IHR). Personnel costs, including skilled health, public health, and animal health workers, are the single most influential cost driver, comprising 66% of total costs. These findings, and the data generated by this effort, provide cost estimates to inform ongoing health security financing discussions at the global level. The results highlight the significant need for sustainable financing mechanisms for both workforce development and ongoing support for the health and public health workforce.

Multisectoral cost analysis of a human and livestock anthrax outbreak in Songwe Region, Tanzania (December 2018-January 2019), using a novel Outbreak Costing Tool

OBJECTIVES

We applied a novel Outbreak Costing Tool (OCT), developed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to estimate the costs of investigating and responding to an anthrax outbreak in Tanzania. We also evaluated the OCT's overall utility in its application to a multisectoral outbreak response.

METHODS

We collected data on direct costs associated with a human and animal anthrax outbreak in Songwe Region (December 2018 to January 2019) using structured questionnaires from key-informants. We performed a cost analysis by entering direct costs data into the OCT, grouped into seven cost categories: labor, office, travel and transport, communication, laboratory support, medical countermeasures, and consultancies.

RESULTS

The total cost for investigating and responding to this outbreak was estimated at 102,232 United States dollars (USD), with travel and transport identified as the highest cost category (62,536 USD) and communication and consultancies as the lowest, with no expenditure, for the combined human and animal health sectors.

CONCLUSIONS

Multisectoral investigation and response may become complex due to coordination challenges, thus allowing escalation of public health impacts. A standardized framework for collecting and analysing cost data is vital to understanding the nature of outbreaks, in anticipatory planning, in outbreak investigation and in reducing time to intervention. Pre-emptive use of the OCT will also reduce overall and specific (response period) intervention costs for the disease. Additional aggregation of the costs by government ministries, departments and tiers will improve the use of the tool to enhance sectoral budget planning for disease outbreaks in a multisectoral response.

An introduction to economic studies, health emergencies, and COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has created widespread harm and disruption. Countries have implemented unprecedented measures to protect the lives and livelihoods of their inhabitants. The scope and composition of these responses are shaped, in part, by research and analysis about the estimated economic impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic and proposed responses to it. This analysis outlines basic features and principles involved in economic studies, specifically economic impact studies and economic evaluations, which have formed a significant part of the ever-increasing evidence base about COVID-19. This analysis introduces economic studies in this context, highlighting what they can do, their limitations, and key steps involved in conducting them. It highlights examples of economic analysis focused on COVID-19 and on health emergencies and disasters more broadly. Knowing how economic studies are conducted, and their limitations, will help introduce how their findings can be a useful, usable, and used part of efforts to tackle this global health crisis.