Early Response to COVID-19 in the Philippines

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with weak health systems are especially vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we describe the challenges and early response of the Philippine Government, focusing on travel restrictions, community interventions, risk communication and testing, from 30 January 2020 when the first case was reported, to 21 March 2020. Our narrative provides a better understanding of the specific limitations of the Philippines and other LMICs, which could serve as basis for future action to improve national strategies for current and future public health outbreaks and emergencies

Public Trust and the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign: Lessons from the Philippines as it Emerges from the Dengvaxia Controversy

While the entire world prepares and begins to roll out COVID-19 vaccines, the Philippines is still reeling from the consequences of the Dengvaxia controversy in 2016. Those highly political events led to the erosion of public trust in leaders and a significant damage to vaccine confidence in the country, now potentially impacting the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. We discuss how public trust and confidence can be rehabilitated through accountability, transparency, and proper communication from the most trusted sources of the population. We also highlight key lessons for policymakers and leaders on allowing science to take the front seat, and politics behind, for the safety and well-being of the people during this public health crisis

The Philippines Health System Review

The Asia Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies (‎‎the APO)‎‎ is a collaborative partnership of interested governments, international agencies, foundations, and researchers that promotes evidence-informed health systems policy regionally and in all countries in the Asia Pacific region. The APO collaboratively identifies priority health system issues across the Asia Pacific region; develops and synthesizes relevant research to support and inform countries\u27 evidence-based policy development; and builds country and regional health systems research and evidence-informed policy capacity

Social cohesion vs COVID-19

Purpose The control of particularly virulent communicable diseases such as COVID-19 can be considered a global public good. Unabated contagion, both within and across borders, can result in a global public bad. More effective control – such as by flattening the epidemiological curve – could prevent severe social and economic disruption by allowing domestic health and social protection systems to more adequately respond to the health crisis. This article elaborates on some of the main elements of counter COVID-19 responses, drawing on emerging international good practices. While a full evaluation of policy effectiveness is still forthcoming, it is critical to review and synthesize the emerging lessons and evidence even this early. Design/methodology/approach This article reviews the international good practices in counter COVID-19 responses across countries. Findings Concerted efforts across borders, such as by sharing data and collaborating in research and by coordinating international support for countercyclical economic and health responses at the national level, are some of the options for countering COVID-19 at the international level. Within countries, more inclusive social protection and health systems, combined with countercyclical economic policies, and concerted behavioral changes tend to produce more effective collective action against the spread of the disease. Research limitations/implications This study is based on a review of emerging responses to the health crisis. Practical implications The policies and practices reviewed in this paper could feed into better-informed crisis responses to COVID-19 and other types of health shocks. Originality/value This study is among the first general reviews of policy responses to the COVID-19 health crisis

Abordando la crisis de los recursos humanos para la salud: ¿hasta dónde hemos llegado? ¿Qué podemos esperar lograr al 2015?

The World Health Report 2006 identified 57 countries world-wide whose health worker to population density fell below a critical threshold of 2.3 per 1,000 population. This meant that below this critical threshold, a country could not provide the basic health services to its population, defined here as 80% immunization coverage and 80% skilled birth attendance at delivery. Of the 57 countries, 36 are located in Africa. This article reviews the progress countries have made in addressing their health workforce crisis. It cites 3 of the most recent global studies and the indicators used to measure progress. It also features the experiences of 8 countries, namely Malawi, Peru, Ethiopia, Brazil, Thailand, Philippines, Zambia, Mali. Their situations provide a diverse picture of country efforts, challenges, and successes. The article asks the question of whether the target of 25% reduction in the number of crisis countries can be achieved by 2015. This was a goal set by the World Health Assembly in 2008. While the authors wish to remain optimistic about the striving towards this target, their optimism must be matched by an adequate level of investment in countries on HRH development. The next four years will show how much will really be achieved.El reporte mundial de la Salud del 2006 (World Health Report 2006) ha identificado 57 países en los que la densidad de trabajadores de salud con respecto a la población general se encuentra por debajo del umbral crítico de 2,3 por 1000 habitantes. Esto significa que por debajo de este umbral crítico, un país no sería capaz de brindar los servicios básicos para su población, definidos como el 80% de coberturas de inmunización y 80% de atención calificada del parto. De los 57 países, 36 pertenecen al África. Este artículo revisa el progreso realizado por los países para afrontar su crisis de recursos humanos en salud. Cita tres de los estudios mundiales más recientes y los indicadores utilizados para medir el progreso. Asimismo, se presenta la experiencia de ocho países: Malawi, Perú, Etiopía, Brasil, Tailandia, Zambia y Mali. Ello brinda un panorama diverso de esfuerzos, retos y éxitos en cada uno de estos países. El artículo lanza la interrogante sobre si la meta de una reducción del 25% en el número de países en crisis puede lograrse para el año 2015, objetivo definido por la Asamblea Mundial de la Salud en el 2008. El optimismo que los autores quisieran mantener sobre los esfuerzos orientados a esta meta, debe ir sin embargo a la par con un adecuado nivel de inversión de los países en recursos humanos en salud. Los siguientes cuatro años nos mostrarán cuánto en realidad puede ser logrado

Abordando la crisis de los Recursos Humanos para la Salud: ¿Hasta dónde hemos llegado? ¿Qué podemos esperar lograr al 2015?

El reporte mundial de la Salud del 2006 (World Health Report 2006) ha identificado 57 países en los que la densidad de trabajadores de salud con respecto a la población general se encuentra por debajo del umbral crítico de 2,3 por 1000 habitantes. Esto significa que por debajo de este umbral crítico, un país no sería capaz de brindar los servicios básicos para su población, definidos como el 80% de coberturas de inmunización y 80% de atención calificada del parto. De los 57 países, 36 pertenecen al África. Este artículo revisa el progreso realizado por los países para afrontar su crisis de recursos humanos en salud. Cita tres de los estudios mundiales más recientes y los indicadores utilizados para medir el progreso. Asimismo, se presenta la experiencia de ocho países: Malawi, Perú, Etiopía, Brasil, Tailandia, Zambia y Mali. Ello brinda un panorama diverso de esfuerzos, retos y éxitos en cada uno de estos países. El artículo lanza la interrogante sobre si la meta de una reducción del 25% en el número de países en crisis puede lograrse para el año 2015, objetivo definido por la Asamblea Mundial de la Salud en el 2008. El optimismo que los autores quisieran mantener sobre los esfuerzos orientados a esta meta, debe ir sin embargo a la par con un adecuado nivel de inversión de los países en recursos humanos en salud. Los siguientes cuatro años nos mostrarán cuánto en realidad puede ser logrado

A Crisis of Confidence: The Case of Dengvaxia in the Philippines

At the time of publishing this case, a “health crisis of confidence” was gripping the Dengvaxia (dengue vaccine) immunization program in the Philippines. The series of events that led to this could be traced back at least to late 2017, when some government officials under the then newly installed Duterte administration along with a group of stakeholders began to publicly raise issues as to the health impact of the vaccine — with some raising alarms in media that the vaccine directly led to the deaths of children. This case tackles the governance issues surrounding this program, emphasizing the important role of public communication. As there indeed were governance issues surrounding a vaccine program, how best to address them given the potential public health implications? The primary sources of information for this case are key informant interviews with former officials of the Department of Health (DOH). Secondary sources are government-issued documents and statistics, media reports, and journal articles. This case outlines the full timeline of the Dengvaxia crisis, including key events such as: (a) The announcement of Sanofi, the vaccine manufacturer, on November 2017 that Dengvaxia may increase the risk of severe dengue for those who haven\u27t had dengue in the past, which led to a cascade of events leading to the suspension of the dengvaxia program; (b) the spread of false news by well-known individuals in both government and mass media claiming that the vaccine directly caused the deaths of children; (c) the statements of the DOH that criticized Sanofi and Dengvaxia, which reinforced the claim on the vaccine’s ineffectiveness; (d) and the widely publicized and dramatized investigation of the issue, which was widely covered by media in the country and abroad. The politicization of the supposedly scientific issue not only damaged the credibility of the dengue vaccine but also the long-established programs of the DOH, such as the measles immunization program. How could this “health crisis of confidence” have been averted or managed differently? How did the chain of events set up the Dengvaxia program for its controversial fate? How could public information have been managed differently by the various actors

Abordando la crisis de los Recursos Humanos para la Salud: ¿Hasta dónde hemos llegado? ¿Qué podemos esperar lograr al 2015?

El reporte mundial de la Salud del 2006 (World Health Report 2006) ha identificado 57 países en los que la densidad de trabajadores de salud con respecto a la población general se encuentra por debajo del umbral crítico de 2,3 por 1000 habitantes. Esto significa que por debajo de este umbral crítico, un país no sería capaz de brindar los servicios básicos para su población, definidos como el 80% de coberturas de inmunización y 80% de atención calificada del parto. De los 57 países, 36 pertenecen al África. Este artículo revisa el progreso realizado por los países para afrontar su crisis de recursos humanos en salud. Cita tres de los estudios mundiales más recientes y los indicadores utilizados para medir el progreso. Asimismo, se presenta la experiencia de ocho países: Malawi, Perú, Etiopía, Brasil, Tailandia, Zambia y Mali. Ello brinda un panorama diverso de esfuerzos, retos y éxitos en cada uno de estos países. El artículo lanza la interrogante sobre si la meta de una reducción del 25% en el número de países en crisis puede lograrse para el año 2015, objetivo definido por la Asamblea Mundial de la Salud en el 2008. El optimismo que los autores quisieran mantener sobre los esfuerzos orientados a esta meta, debe ir sin embargo a la par con un adecuado nivel de inversión de los países en recursos humanos en salud. Los siguientes cuatro años nos mostrarán cuánto en realidad puede ser logrado