Systemic Resilience to Cross-border Infectious Disease Threat Events in Europe

Recurrent health emergencies threaten global health security. International Health Regulations (IHR) aim to prevent, detect and respond to such threats, through increase in national public health core capacities, but whether IHR core capacity implementation is necessary and sufficient has been contested. With a longitudinal study we relate changes in national IHR core capacities to changes in cross‐border infectious disease threat events (IDTE) between 2010 and 2016, collected through epidemic intelligence at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). By combining all IHR core capacities into one composite measure we found that a 10% increase in the mean of this composite IHR core capacity to be associated with a 19% decrease (p=0.017) in the incidence of cross‐border IDTE in the EU. With respect to specific IHR core capacities, an individual increase in national legislation, policy & financing; coordination and communication with relevant sectors; surveillance; response; preparedness; risk communication; human resource capacity; or laboratory capacity was associated with a significant decrease in cross‐border IDTE incidence. In contrast, our analysis showed that IHR core capacities relating to point‐of‐entry, zoonotic events or food safety were not associated with IDTE in the EU. Due to high internal correlations between core capacities, we conducted a principal component analysis which confirmed a 20% decrease in risk of IDTE for every 10% increase in the core capacity score (95% CI: 0.73, 0.88). Globally (EU excluded), a 10% increase in the mean of all IHR core capacities combined was associated with a 14% decrease (p=0.077) in cross‐border IDTE incidence. We provide quantitative evidence that improvements in IHR core capacities at country‐level are associated with fewer cross‐border IDTE in the EU, which may also hold true for other parts of the world

Increased risk of yellow fever infections among unvaccinated European travellers due to ongoing outbreak in Brazil, July 2017 to March 2018

Since December 2016, Brazil has faced a large outbreak of yellow fever with ca 1,500 confirmed human cases. In the first 2 months of 2018, Brazil reported almost as many cases as in 2017 as a whole. In these 2 months, five imported cases were reported among unvaccinated European travellers. Three had travelled to Ilha Grande, a popular destination among European tourists. Physicians and European travellers visiting Brazil should follow yellow fever vaccination recommendations

The World Health Organization’s public health intelligence activities during the COVID-19 pandemic response, December 2019 to December 2021

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) presented a unique opportunity for the World Health Organization (WHO) to utilise public health intelligence (PHI) for pandemic response. WHO systematically captured mainly unstructured information (e.g. media articles, listservs, community-based reporting) for public health intelligence purposes. WHO used the Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources (EIOS) system as one of the information sources for PHI. The processes and scope for PHI were adapted as the pandemic evolved and tailored to regional response needs. During the early months of the pandemic, media monitoring complemented official case and death reporting through the International Health Regulations mechanism and triggered alerts. As the pandemic evolved, PHI activities prioritised identifying epidemiological trends to supplement the information available through indicator-based surveillance reported to WHO. The PHI scope evolved over time to include vaccine introduction, emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, unusual clinical manifestations and upsurges in cases, hospitalisation and death incidences at subnational levels. Triaging the unprecedented high volume of information challenged surveillance activities but was managed by collaborative information sharing. The evolution of PHI activities using multiple sources in WHO’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic illustrates the future directions in which PHI methodologies could be developed and used.</jats:p

World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for selecting potential signals.

World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for selecting potential signals.</p

Framework of public health intelligence activities at WHO.

Framework of public health intelligence activities at WHO.</p

World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for initiating a rapid risk assessment.

World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for initiating a rapid risk assessment.</p

World Health Organization public health intelligence information flow, associated outputs, and activities.

World Health Organization public health intelligence information flow, associated outputs, and activities.</p

Roles necessary for conducting public health intelligence, by activity.

Roles necessary for conducting public health intelligence, by activity.</p