Planetary Health Education and Capacity Building for Healthcare Professionals in a Global Context: Current Opportunities, Gaps and Future Directions.

The emerging concept of planetary health needs to be discussed in a more organized and sustainable way within the global public health and healthcare disciplines. Therefore, planetary health should be considered a cardinal component of the global academic framework for healthcare professionals. The availability of related curricula and courses is crucial to equip health professionals in this relatively new discipline of planetary health. In this review article, we aimed to explore published articles and online databases of courses to summarize the available planetary health education opportunities and discussions for health professionals, to identify the gaps in resource allocation and to suggest future recommendations. We observed a visible resource inequity in the global south with the lack of a universal planetary health module for healthcare professionals. Additionally, there is minimal inclusion of allied health disciplines in this learning process. We therefore recommend a dedicated network of motivated healthcare professionals and regional hubs with an agenda to ensure a comprehensive, uniform, and inclusive planetary health education curriculum and practice.

Changes in life expectancy and disease burden in Norway, 1990-2019: an analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

BACKGROUND: Geographical differences in health outcomes are reported in many countries. Norway has led an active policy aiming for regional balance since the 1970s. Using data from the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) 2019, we examined regional differences in development and current state of health across Norwegian counties. METHODS: Data for life expectancy, healthy life expectancy (HALE), years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in Norway and its 11 counties from 1990 to 2019 were extracted from GBD 2019. County-specific contributors to changes in life expectancy were compared. Inequality in disease burden was examined by use of the Gini coefficient. FINDINGS: Life expectancy and HALE improved in all Norwegian counties from 1990 to 2019. Improvements in life expectancy and HALE were greatest in the two counties with the lowest values in 1990: Oslo, in which life expectancy and HALE increased from 71·9 years (95% uncertainty interval 71·4-72·4) and 63·0 years (60·5-65·4) in 1990 to 81·3 years (80·0-82·7) and 70·6 years (67·4-73·6) in 2019, respectively; and Troms og Finnmark, in which life expectancy and HALE increased from 71·9 years (71·5-72·4) and 63·5 years (60·9-65·6) in 1990 to 80·3 years (79·4-81·2) and 70·0 years (66·8-72·2) in 2019, respectively. Increased life expectancy was mainly due to reductions in cardiovascular disease, neoplasms, and respiratory infections. No significant differences between the national YLD or DALY rates and the corresponding age-standardised rates were reported in any of the counties in 2019; however, Troms og Finnmark had a higher age-standardised YLL rate than the national rate (8394 per 100 000 [95% UI 7801-8944] vs 7536 per 100 000 [7391-7691]). Low inequality between counties was shown for life expectancy, HALE, all level-1 causes of DALYs, and exposure to level-1 risk factors. INTERPRETATION: Over the past 30 years, Norway has reduced inequality in disease burden between counties. However, inequalities still exist at a within-county level and along other sociodemographic gradients. Because of insufficient Norwegian primary data, there remains substantial uncertainty associated with regional estimates for non-fatal disease burden and exposure to risk factors. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Research Council of Norway, and Norwegian Institute of Public Health.

A comprehensive situation assessment of injection practices in primary health care hospitals in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Understanding injection practices is crucial for evidence-based development of intervention initiatives. This study explored the extent of injection use and injection safety practices in primary care hospitals in Bangladesh. METHODS: The study employed both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The methods used were--a retrospective audit of prescriptions (n = 4320), focus group discussions (six with 43 participants), in-depth interviews (n = 38) with a range service providers, and systematic observation of the activities of injection providers (n = 120), waste handlers (n = 48) and hospital facilities (n = 24). Quantitative and qualitative data were assessed with statistical and thematic analysis, respectively, and then combined. RESULTS: As many as 78% of our study sample (n = 4230) received an injection. The most commonly prescribed injections (n = 3354) including antibiotics (78.3%), IV fluids (38.6%), analgesics/pain killers (29.4%), vitamins (26.7%), and anti-histamines (18.5%). Further, 43.7% (n = 1145) of the prescribed antibiotics (n = 2626) were given to treat diarrhea and 42.3% (n = 600) of IV fluids (n = 1295) were used to manage general weakness conditions. Nearly one-third (29.8%; n = 36/120) of injection providers reported needle-stick injuries in the last 6 months with highest incidences in Rajshahi division followed by Dhaka division. Disposal of injection needles, syringes and other materials was not done properly in 83.5% (n = 20/24) of the facilities. Health providers' safety concerns were not addressed properly; only 23% (n = 28/120) of the health providers and 4.2% (n = 2/48) of the waste handlers were fully immunized against Hepatitis B virus. Moreover, 73% (n = 87/120) of the injection providers and 90% (n = 43/48) of the waste handlers were not trained in injection safety practices and infection prevention. Qualitative data further confirmed that both providers and patients preferred injections, believing that they provide quick relief. The doctors' perceived injection use as their prescribing norm that enabled them to prove their professional credibility and to remain popular in a competitive health care market. Additionally, persistent pressure from hospital administration to use up injections before their expiry dates also influenced doctors to prescribe injections regardless of actual indications. CONCLUSIONS: As far as the patients and providers' safety is concerned, this study demonstrated a need for further research exploring the dynamics of injection use and safety in Bangladesh. In a context where a high level of injection use and unsafe practices were reported, immediate prevention initiatives need to be operated through continued intervention efforts and health providers' training in primary care hospitals in Bangladesh.