The Delivery of Health Promotion and Environmental Health Services; Public Health or Primary Care Settings?

Addressing health inequity during the COVID-19 pandemic through primary health care and public health collaboration: a multiple case study analysis in eight high-income countries

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic substantially magnified the inequity gaps among vulnerable populations. Both public health (PH) and primary health care (PHC) have been crucial in addressing the challenges posed by the pandemic, especially in the area of vulnerable populations. However, little is known about the intersection between PH and PHC as a strategy to mitigate the inequity gap. This study aims to assess the collaboration between PHC and PH with a focus on addressing the health needs of vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic across jurisdictions.

METHODS

We analyzed and compared data from jurisdictional reports of COVID-19 pandemic responses in PHC and PH in Belgium, Canada (Ontario), Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, and Spain from 2020 to 2021.

RESULTS

Four themes emerge from the analysis: (1) the majority of the countries implemented outreach strategies targeting vulnerable groups as a means to ensure continued access to PHC; (2) digital assessment in PHC was found to be present across all the countries; (3) PHC was insufficiently represented at the decision-making level; (4) there is a lack of clear communication channels between PH and PHC in all the countries.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified opportunities for collaboration between PHC and PH to reduce inequity gaps and to improve population health, focusing on vulnerable populations. The COVID-19 response in these eight countries has demonstrated the importance of an integrated PHC system. Consequently, the development of effective strategies for responding to and planning for pandemics should take into account the social determinants of health in order to mitigate the unequal impact of COVID-19. Careful, intentional coordination between PH and PHC should be established in normal times as a basis for effective response during future public health emergencies. The pandemic has provided significant insights on how to strengthen health systems and provide universal access to healthcare by fostering stronger connections between PH and PHC.

Audit of essential infection prevention and control content provided within undergraduate/postgraduate public health programs across Australian and New Zealand universities

BACKGROUND

To describe and analyse the infection prevention and control (IPC) curricula within Public Health degrees across Australian and New Zealand Universities and identify foundational IPC knowledge deficits.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of public health and related programs across tertiary education institutions within Australia and New Zealand was conducted to comprehensively illustrate the current inclusion of IPC core and elective courses and identify areas of IPC content deficit.

RESULTS

Australian (n = 32) and New Zealand (n = 9) universities were audited, consisting of 217 public health/public health related degrees within Australia and 45 within New Zealand. Within Australia 41% of public health degrees and 49% in New Zealand did not offer any IPC content as core or elective subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Public health tertiary education in Australia and New Zealand is lacking in equipping and imbedding IPC skills and knowledge in public health graduates. This highlights the need for a framework guiding mandatory IPC content within Australian and New Zealand public health programs.

Biological warfare: the history of microbial pathogens, biotoxins and emerging threats

Bioterrorism is the deliberate misuse of a pathogen (virus, bacterium or other disease-causing microorganisms) or biotoxin (poisonous substance produced by an organism) to cause illness and death amongst the population. Bioterrorism and biological warfare (biowarfare) are terms often used interchangeably. However, bioterrorism is typically attributed to the politically motivated use of biological weapons by a rogue state, terrorist organisation or rogue individual whereas biological warfare refers to a country’s use of bioweapons. Although rare, bioterrorism is a rapidly evolving threat to global security due to significant advancements in biotechnology in recent years and the severity of agents that could be exploited. The pursuit of publicity plays a vital role in bioterrorism. The success of a biological attack is often calculated by the extent of terror resulting from the event, psychological disruption of society and political breakdown, rather than the lethal effects of the agent used.