Общественное здравоохранение

[Наталья П.]

EU health trends and analysis
This report investigates differences in health status within and between European countries. The relationship between living conditions, socioeconomic factors and health is discussed and analysed with the objective of stimulating a debate and policy action for creating a healthier and more equitable society.

Available at: [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]

[Наталья П.]

TEACH-VIP E-Learning is an online self-paced curriculum in violence and injury prevention, designed for health and public professionals and other health care providers; staff of public health ministries and non-governmental organizations; and students in schools of medicine, nursing, and public health.

TEACH-VIP E-Learning addresses a broad range of issues pertinent to understanding and preventing injuries, violence, and suicide. It includes extensive content on using data to understanding injury problems and creating programmes to address these problems.

Learners can choose from 20 lessons to create an experience appropriate to their needs and schedule. Each lesson can be completed in approximately one hour - although optional activities and readings are available that can add to the time needed to finish a lesson.

There is no cost for using TEACH-VIP E-Learning.

[Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]

[Наталья П.]

OECD HEALTH WORKING PAPERS No. 50, 2010-05-10
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD 28-Apr-2010

Available online PDF [140p.] at:

[Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]

“…..This paper presents the informaton provided by 29 of these countries in 2009. It describes country-specific arrangements to organise the population coverage against health risks and the financing of health spending.

It depicts the organisation of health care delivery, focusing on the public/private mix of health care provision, provider payment schemes, user choice and competition among providers, as well as the regulation of heallth care suppply and prices.


Finally, this document provides information on governance and resource allocation in health systems. (decentralisation in decisionmaking, nature of budget constraints and priority setting)….”

[Наталья П.]

Knowledge to Policy: Making the Most of Development Research

Fred Carden, currently the Director of Evaluation at the International Development Research Centre in Ottawa, Canada
International Development Research Centre 2009 - Sage/IDRC ISBN 978-81-7829-930-3

e-ISBN 978-1-55250-417-8 - 224 pp.

Available online at: [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]

“…….Does research influence public policy and decision-making and, if so, how? This book is the most recent to address this question, investigating the effects of research in the field of international development. It starts from a sophisticated understanding about how research influences public policy and decision-making. It shows how research can contribute to better governance in at least three ways: by encouraging open inquiry and debate, by empowering people with the knowledge to hold governments accountable, and by enlarging the array of policy options and solutions available to the policy process.

[Наталья П.]

The hope and the promise of the UN Resolution on non-communicable diseases

George Alleyne 1, David Stuckler 2, 3*, Ala Alwan 4

1 Pan American Health Organization Washington D.C., USA

2 Department of Sociology, Oxford University, United Kingdom

3London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Department of Public Health Policy, United Kingdom

4 World Health Organization, Assistant Director-General, Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health, Geneva, Switzerland

9 September 2010

Globalization and Health 2010, 6:15 doi:10.1186/1744-8603-6-15



Available online PDF [8p.] at: [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]



“…….On May 13, 2010, the United Nations General Assembly passed resolution 265, „Prevention and control of non-communicable diseases‟[1], a major political statement calling for Heads of State to address NCDs in a „High Level‟ plenary meeting scheduled for September 2011. Out of this meeting, and its associated “outcome document”, will come a series of programmatic steps by all UN members.


We cannot understate the potential of this UN resolution to make chronic noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) a global priority among international leaders. While in the past there have been numerous resolutions in the World Health Organization World Health Assembly for greater action on NCDs, this UN resolution has special significance, as it comes with the hope to achieve multisectoral commitment and promise to deliver change.



However, its overall effectiveness will depend on the ability of the international community to take advantage of this powerful political opportunity to institutionalize NCD prevention and control into policies and programmes within the broader development agenda.



In this editorial we describe the kinds of outcomes that are possible and needed, and outline strategies for generating global interest as part of a social movement so to ensure commitment by Heads of State…..”

[Наталья П.]

International variation in the usage of medicines

A review of the literature

Ellen Nolte, Jennifer Newbould, Annalijn Conklin

2010 RAND Europe - Prepared for the Department of Health within the PRP project "An 'On-call' facility for International Healthcare Comparisons"

Available online PDF [57p.] at: [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]

“…..This report reviews the published and grey literature on international variation in the use of medicines, focusing on osteoporosis, atypical anti-psychotics, dementia, rheumatoid arthritis, cardiovascular disease/lipid-regulating drugs (statins), and hepatitis C.



The report aims to inform the Steering Group “Extent and Causes of International Variation in Drug Usage” to guide further analytical work on the extent and causes of international variation in drug usage.



The report was prepared as part of the project “An ‘On-call’ Facility for International Healthcare Comparisons” funded by the Department of Health in England through its Policy Research Programme (grant no. 0510002). The project comprises a programme of work on international health care comparisons that provides intelligence on new developments in other countries, involving a network of experts in a range of OECD countries to inform health policy development in England. It is conducted by RAND Europe, in conjunction with the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine…..”



“….The systematic search found surprisingly few international comparative studies that examined medicines use and these varied widely in terms of quality and focus, populations and time periods studied, and outcomes measured. However, despite this variation several common issues emerged from the evidence reviewed here. We identify three broad groups of determinants of international variation in medicines use:

· Macro- or system level factors. Differences in reimbursement policies, and the role of health technology assessment, were highlighted as a likely driving force of international variation in almost all areas of medicines use reviewed here, including dementia, rheumatoid arthritis, hepatitis C, and, for some countries in central and eastern Europe, statins. A related but rarely studied aspect is patient co-payment, potentially explaining some of the international variation in medicines use, which is likely to play an important role in the United States in particular, compared with European countries; but the extent to which cost-sharing policies impact on overall use of medicines in international comparison remains unclear.

· Service organisation and delivery. Most studies reviewed here pointed to differences in access to specialists as a likely driver of international variation in areas such as atypical antipsychotics, dementia, and rheumatic arthritis, with for example access to and availability of relevant specialists identified as acting as a crucial bottleneck for accessing treatment for dementia and rheumatoid arthritis.

· Clinical practice. Several studies highlighted the role of variation in the use and ascertainment methods for mental disorders, and differences in the use of clinical or practice guidelines. Many studies further pointed to differences in prescribing patterns as an important factor, along with a potential reluctance among clinicians in some countries to take up newer medicines, but none of the studies presented here provided empirical evidence to support this notion.

Each of these factors is likely to play a role in explaining international variation in medicines use, but their relative importance will vary depending on the disease area in question and the system context………..”

Content:

Executive summary

CHAPTER 1 Background

CHAPTER 2 Osteoporosis

CHAPTER 3 Atypical anti-psychotics

CHAPTER 4 Dementia

CHAPTER 5 Rheumatoid arthritis

CHAPTER 6 Cardiovascular disease lipid-regulating drugs/statins

CHAPTER 7 Hepatitis C

CHAPTER 8 Summary and conclusions

8.1 Macro- or system-level determinants

8.2 Service organisation determinants

8.3 Clinical practice determinants

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

[Наталья П.]

Equity-Oriented Toolkit for Health Technology Assessment (HTA)

The WHO Collaborating Centre for Knowledge Translation and Health Technology Assessment in Health Equity, housed at the Centre for Global Health at the University of Ottawa, is currently in the process of updating and expanding its Equity-Oriented Toolkit.

Website: [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]

The Equity -Oriented Toolkit is based on a needs-based model of HTA. It provides tools that explicitly consider health equity at each of the four steps of health technology assessment:
1) Burden of Illness,
2) Community Effectiveness,
3) Economic Evaluation,
4) Knowledge Translation and Implementation.

It also incorporates concepts of health impact assessment within the HTA process. They are seeking suggestions on validated and widely disseminated HTA tools that explicitly consider health equity and that are relevant to the toolkit.

These tools may be specific analytical methods such as the Disability-Adjusted Life Years, checklists such as the Health Impact Screening Checklist, software programs such as the Harvard Policy Maker, databases such as The Cochrane Library, etc.

For more information on the Toolkit and additional examples of tools to be included, or suggestions of tools to be considered, please contact
Maria Benkhalti Jandu [Ссылки доступны только зарегистрированным пользователям ]