Expanding Global Health Engagement through Multilateral Security Organizations.

INTRODUCTION: Many countries around the world employ defense capabilities in support of global health engagement (GHE) through bilateral and multilateral organizations. Despite this, there does not appear to be a strategic approach and implementation plan for U.S. DoD GHE in support of and through multilateral organizations. The purpose of this research is to identify which security multilateral organizations are engaged in GHE, as well as how and why. These findings could inform an interoperable approach for doing so going forward. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to develop a list of multilateral security organizations and agreements which engage in GHE, or could potentially play a role in GHE. RESULTS: Of the 3,488 agreements and organizations identified, 15 met the inclusion criteria. Among them, 87% (13/15) of the multilateral organizations are regional and 13% (2/15) are international, all established between 1948 and 2020. The 15 organizations cover all DoD Geographical Combatant Commands. Among them, 20% (3/15) are a legally binding alliance, 73% (11/15) have a treaty, and 7% (1/15) have a diplomatic partnership. Twenty percent (3/15) have an explicit intent to improve health in either their mission statement or as part of their goals, priorities, and/or objectives. Eighty percent (12/15) engage in at least two GHE domains outlined in DoD Policy, 67% in three (10/15), and 47% in all four (7/15). The most common domain is humanitarian assistance and foreign disaster response at 100% (15/15) and least common is Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs at 53% (8/15). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is high demand for GHE, resourcing to enable implementation has not been prioritized. Therefore, multilateral organizations continue to support what is funded (e.g., disaster response) versus prioritizing capacity building or modifying authorities and appropriations to match demand. It is also worth noting most organizations included in this review support the European theater aligning to historical defense priorities, versus emerging threats in the Indo-Pacific region. Identifying a forum within these multilateral institutions to convene GHE policy makers and practitioners is a logical next step. The forums could guide and direct priorities, devise solutions, and implement best practices. Near term efforts could include GHE financing, governance, assurance, and technical assistance within and across multilateral institutions. Recent efforts highlight growth in both interest and action to support the variety of GHE activities regionally and internationally. As the United States seeks to reinforce multilateral institutions and uphold the international and rules-based order, employing GHE through multilateral cooperation could buttress efforts. Now is a perfect time given the sustained interest in global health, amplified value of allies and partners, and renewed emphasis placed on multilateral cooperation for the DoD to design a multilateral GHE strategy and seek Congressional support to resource it accordingly.

Enhancing Partner Nation Security: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of A Peacekeeping Public Health Capacity Building Initiative.

INTRODUCTION: One way the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) works to achieve national security is through security cooperation, by way of building and enhancing partner nation capacity. This study evaluated a health-related security cooperation training initiative delivered by the DoD to military peacekeepers. The study specifically examined outcomes of change, including the beginning phase of sustainability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The U.S. DoD employed a train-the-trainer model in Ghana, Rwanda, Senegal, and Uganda to support the African Peacekeeping Rapid Response Partnership program. U.S. instructors trained 192 peacekeepers through 11 training iterations between December 2016 and March 2020. A mixed-method explanatory sequential design was used to explore training outcomes. Quantitatively, three hypotheses were tested using nonparametric statistical analysis. Qualitative analysis of documents was used to inform and contextually understand the quantitative results. This study was submitted to the George Washington University Institutional Review Board and was fully approved (NCR202918). RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative results indicated improved short-term public health knowledge and upskill among partner nation participants. There was the beginning of a cascade effect of the partner nations' ability to autonomously teach tasks and skills to their military to sustain the initiative. Differences in achieving and maintaining change outcomes were related to student characteristics, the training course, and the partner nation. CONCLUSIONS: This research serves as the first published study to empirically examine health-related security cooperation train-the-trainer initiative change outcomes. This research is an essential building block to empirically evaluate and capture change outcomes from security cooperation capacity building training initiatives. The findings and recommendations inform security cooperation policy and associated investments.

After the Trauma: The Role of Rehabilitation Medicine in U.S. DoD Global Health Engagement.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) possesses significant expertise with rehabilitation of combat injured personnel. This is an area of growing interest with Global Health Engagement (GHE), particularly in countries with active conflict such as Ukraine. Effective rehabilitation can contribute to both development and security, and by leveraging its inherent expertise via rehabilitation-based GHE, the DoD can contribute to these strategic objectives.

On Protection of U.S. Forces From Global Health Threats: The Role of Health Security Advisors.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has exposed a health security gap within our nation and around the world. Recent national laws and policies have outlined the ends and means to improve health security. A decisive way is to achieve this objective is through health-related security cooperation efforts by increasing Health Services Support capacity.

International Trauma Capacity Building Programs: Modernizing Capabilities, Enhancing Lethality, Supporting Alliances, Building Partnerships, and Implementing Reform.

The Military Health System directly supports the National Security and Defense Strategy priorities of modernizing capabilities, enhancing lethality, supporting alliances, building partnerships, and implementing reform. Trauma medicine training programs with partner nations is a key lever that can be pulled, using a risk-based decision-making process, to scale up efforts toward these national priorities.

Enhancing Military Field Hospitals: World Health Organization Emergency Medical Team Verification.

Despite the significant investment in the U.S. and partner nation military field hospital capability, the DoD has not pursued WHO Emergency Medical Team verification. Doing so would reinforce the DoD as an international leader, uphold the DoD as a partner of choice for response when requested, and enable the DoD to assist other nations in achieving the same.

Bangladesh Fistula Mission Partnership: Leveraging Assets from the United States Agency for International Development and the Department of Defense to Address a Health Care Crisis in a Developing Nation.

INTRODUCTION: Obstetric fistulae are a leading scourge for women in developing countries resulting, in severe individual suffering and devastating socio-economic repercussions for her family and community. The underlying causes of obstetric fistula stem from multiple factors to include poor nutrition, early marriage, insufficient education and inferior social status of women as well as substandard medical care. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) has invested more than $100 million globally since 2004 to address these factors as well as support women suffering with fistulae. The ultimate goal is to eradicate obstetric fistula in Bangladesh in the next 20 years. Despite these efforts, nearly 20,000 women in Bangladesh, still suffer with this malady. METHODS: To close this gap, USAID and the Department of Defense (DOD) developed a novel Interagency Agreement (IAA) leveraging the surgical skills of military health professionals to scale-up the ongoing fistula care program. The agreement outlined three lines of effort: (1) treat existing fistulae by bolstering surgical capacity of the existing USAID fistula care program; (2) promote fistula mitigation with lectures and hands-on teaching of obstetric care as well as safe gynecologic surgery; and (3) assist with advocacy at higher levels of the Bangladesh government. A Bangladesh Fistula Mission Partnership working group was formed to design and implement this IAA. Critical partners from the US Embassy in Dhaka included USAID (Health, Legal, Contracting), the DOD (Office of Defense Cooperation), and Department of State (Regional Security Officer). Partners from the US Army included United States Army-Pacific Command (Surgeon, Legal, Finance, Security Cooperation, Contracting), Regional Health Command-Pacific (Operations, Legal, Public Affairs), and Tripler Army Medical Center (Department of OBGYN, Operations, Public Affairs). Institutional Review Board approval was not required as the treatments offered were standard of care. RESULTS: The Tripler Army Medical Center (TAMC) health professionals executed the IAA with one pre-deployment site survey and two surgical missions in 2016-2017. The military team supported the surgical repair of 40 pelvic fistulae and perineal tears and provided operative management for an additional 25 patients with pelvic organ prolapse. Furthermore, the team conducted 19 professional lectures and multiple educational forums at hospitals in Kumudini, Khulna and the premier medical university in Dhaka for over 800 attendees including physicians, nurses and students to help prevent obstetric and surgical fistulae. Importantly, the team assisted USAID as subject matter experts in its advocacy to the Bangladesh Ministry of Health for improved maternity care and regulatory oversight. During the missions, the team enhanced their readiness by exercising individual and collective tasks while exposing personnel to the cultural context of the region. CONCLUSION: This IAA was the first USAID funded and DoD-executed health mission in the US Indo-Pacific Command Area of Responsibility. Direct participation in the IAA enabled TAMC to support the US Indo-Pacific Command Theater Campaign Plan, the Department of Defense Instruction 2000.30 on Global Health Engagements, the USAID Country Development Cooperation Strategy, and the US Ambassadors Integrated Country Strategy Objectives in Bangladesh. This effort can serve as a model for future cooperation between USAID and the DoD.

Militaries and global health: peace, conflict, and disaster response.

Many countries show a growing willingness to use militaries in support of global health efforts. This Series paper summarises the varied roles, responsibilities, and approaches of militaries in global health, drawing on examples and case studies across peacetime, conflict, and disaster response environments. Militaries have many capabilities applicable to global health, ranging from research, surveillance, and medical expertise to rapidly deployable, large-scale assets for logistics, transportation, and security. Despite this large range of capabilities, militaries also have limitations when engaging in global health activities. Militaries focus on strategic, operational, and tactical objectives that support their security and defence missions, which can conflict with humanitarian and global health equity objectives. Guidelines-both within and outside militaries-for military engagement in global health are often lacking, as are structured opportunities for military and civilian organisations to engage one another. We summarise policies that can help close the gap between military and civilian actors to catalyse the contributions of all participants to enhance global health.

Hospital ships adrift? Part 2: the role of US Navy hospital ship humanitarian assistance missions in building partnerships.

INTRODUCTION: US Navy hospital ships are used as a foreign policy instrument to achieve various objectives that include building partnerships. Despite substantial resource investment by the Department of Defense (DoD) in these missions, their impact is unclear. The purpose of this study was to understand how and why hospital ship missions influence partnerships among the different participants. METHODS: An embedded case study was used and included the hospital ship Mercy's mission to Timor-Leste in 2008 and 2010 with four units of analysis: the US government, partner nation, host nation, and nongovernmental organizations. Key stakeholders representing each unit were interviewed using open-ended questions that explored the experiences of each participant and their organization. Findings were analyzed using a priori domains from a proposed partnership theoretical framework. A documentary review of key policy, guidance, and planning documents was also conducted. RESULTS: Fifteen themes related to how and why hospital ship missions influence partnerships emerged from the 37 interviews and documentary review. The five most prominent included: developing relationships, developing new perspectives, sharing resources, understanding partner constraints, and developing credibility. Facilitators to joining the mission included partner nations seeking a regional presence and senior executive relationships. Enablers included historical relationships and host nation receptivity. The primary barrier to joining was the military leading the mission. Internal constraints included the short mission duration, participant resentment, and lack of personnel continuity. External constraints included low host nation and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) capacity. CONCLUSION: The research finds the idea of building partnerships exists among most units of analysis. However, the results show a delay in downstream effects of generating action and impact among the participants. Without a common partnership definition and policy, guidance, and planning documents reinforcing these constructs, achieving the partnership goal will remain challenging. Efforts should be made to magnify the facilitators and enablers while developing mitigation strategies for the barriers and constraints. This is the first study to scientifically assess the partnership impact of hospital ship missions and could support the DoD's effort to establish, enable, and sustain meaningful partnerships. Application of the findings to improve partnerships in contexts beyond hospital ship missions may be warranted and require further analysis. This unique opportunity could bridge the rift with humanitarian actors and establish, enable, and sustain meaningful partnerships with the DoD.

Priorities for a 21st-century defense: aligning u.s. Army environmental science and engineering officer resources with the department of defense strategic guidance.

The recently published Department of Defense (DoD) strategic guidance highlights the need to ?shape a joint force for the future.? Supporting requirements to shape the joint force while the overall DoD force structure is reduced will be challenging. Fortunately, based on its unique training and experience, the Army Environmental Science and Engineering Officer (ESEO) profession is positioned today to fill anticipated joint public health requirements. Obtaining the U.S. Army Medical Department (AMEDD) approval to meet these requirements will have near-term consequences for the ESEO profession as some existing (albeit antiquated) authorizations may go unfilled. However, long-term dividends for the Medical Service Corps (MSC), AMEDD, Army, and DoD will be achieved by realigning critical resources to future joint and interagency requirements. Assigning ESEOs now to organizations such as the Theater Special Operations Commands (TSOCs), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) with perceived and real joint force health protection/public health requirements through unique means will ensure our profession remains relevant today and supports the joint force of tomorrow.

Hospital ships adrift? Part 1: a systematic literature review characterizing US Navy hospital ship humanitarian and disaster response, 2004-2012.

BACKGROUND: United States foreign policy is tied extensively to health initiatives, many related to the use of military assets. Despite substantial resource investment by the US Department of Defense (DoD) in hospital ship humanitarian assistance and disaster response missions, the impact of this investment is unclear. METHODS: A systematic literature review of both peer-reviewed and grey literature using eight databases representing the international community and multiple sectors was conducted. Data on the characteristics of missions directly related to US Navy hospital ship humanitarian assistance and disaster response from 2004-2012 were extracted and documented. RESULTS: Of the 1445 sources reviewed, a total of 43 publications met criteria for review. Six (13.9%) met empirical documentation criteria and 37 (86.0%) were considered nonempirical expert opinions and anecdotal accounts that were primarily descriptive in nature. Overall, disaster response accounted for 67.4% (29/43) and humanitarian assistance 25.6% (11/43). Public and private sector participants produced 79.0% (34/43) and 20.9% (9/43) of the publications respectively. Of private sector publications, 88.9% (8/9) focused on disaster response compared to 61.8% (21/34) from the public sector. Of all publications meeting inclusion criteria, 81.4% (35/43) focused on medical care, 9.3% (4/43) discussed partnerships, 4.7% (2/43) training, and 4.7% (2/43) medical ethics and strategic utilization. No primary author publications from the diplomatic, development, or participating host nations were identified. One (2.3%) of the 43 publications was from a partner nation participant. Discussion Without rigorous research methods yielding valid and reliable data-based information pertaining to Navy hospital ship mission impact, policy makers are left with anecdotal reports to influence their decision-making processes. This is inadequate considering the frequency of hospital ship deployments used as a foreign policy tool and the considerable funding that is involved in each mission. Future research efforts should study empirically the short- and long-term impacts of hospital ship missions in building regional and civil-military partnerships while meeting the humanitarian and disaster response needs of host nation populations.

Medical stability operations--one approach to transforming the Department of Defense Military Health System.

The Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 6000.16 entitled Military Health Support for Stability Operations was published in 2010 and established policy that Medical Stability Operations (MSOs) would be a core military mission. The instruction set out to institutionalize how the Military Health Support (MHS) would effectively support MSOs and assist in bridging the gap with other actors operating in the same space. What is less clear is the current status of the MHS in accomplishing the responsibilities outlined in the DoDI. Even more concerning is how these efforts will support the "new" strategic guidance for the DoD published in January 2012 that states U.S. forces will no longer be sized to conduct large-scale, prolonged stability operations. In the absence of a publicly available DoDI 6000.16 implementation strategy, this article proposes the use of an organizational transformation process developed by internationally acclaimed leadership and organizational change expert Dr. John Kotter. The eight-step process is used as a framework to explore ways to effectively transform the DoD in meeting the intent of the MSOs DoDI. The past decade has transformed how service members think about MSOs. Now is the time to transform the MHS with urgency to institutionalize these thoughts.

Disaster preparedness--formalizing a comparative advantage for the Department of Defense in U.S. global health and foreign policy.

Disaster preparedness is a comparative advantage of the Department of Defense (DoD) in the global health arena. It is in line with the domestic interest of sustaining foreign natural disaster assistance and the foreign policy interest of maintaining national security. The DoD humanitarian assistance policy guidance published in 2009 states Disaster Preparedness should be considered as a key priority in humanitarian assistance engagement. Unfortunately, a whole of government disaster preparedness program framework does not exist to facilitate effective and efficient implementation. Leveraging the United Nations Hyogo Framework for Action agreed upon by 168 nations to take action and reduce disaster risk by 2015, the DoD could synchronize disaster preparedness efforts with other interagency and international partners. Increased civilian-military cooperation in disaster risk reduction supports the whole of government approach to work in a more coherent manner in pursuit of shared foreign policy goals. It also maximizes the ability to deliver critical national capacity in the health sector and beyond. Disaster preparedness is an essential element of U.S. global health and foreign policy, and the DoD must be a critical partner in a whole of government approach.