Principles of supply chain management in the time of crisis.

Hospitals face catastrophic financial challenges in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Acute shortages in materials such as masks, ventilators, intensive care unit capacity, and personal protective equipment (PPE) are a significant concern. The future success of supply chain management involves increasing the transparency of where our raw materials are sourced, diversifying of our product resources, and improving our technology that is able to predict potential shortages. It is also important to develop a proactive budgeting strategy to meet supply demands through early designation of dependable roles to support organizations and through the education of healthcare staff. In this paper, we discuss supply chain management, governance and financing, emergency protocols, including emergency procurement and supply chain, supply chain gaps and how to address them, and the importance of communication in the times of crisis.

Health technology assessment applied to emergency preparedness: a new perspective.

Emergency preparedness is a continuous quality improvement process through which roles and responsibilities are defined to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover from the impact of emergencies. This process results in documented plans that provide a backbone structure for developing the core capacities to address health threats. Nevertheless, several barriers can impair an effective preparedness planning, as it needs a 360° perspective to address each component according to the best evidence and practice. Preparedness planning shares common principles with health technology assessment (HTA) as both encompass a multidisciplinary and multistakeholder approach, follow an iterative cycle, adopt a 360° perspective on the impact of intervention measures, and conclude with decision-making support. Our "Perspective" illustrates how each HTA domain can address different component(s) of a preparedness plan that can indeed be seen as a container of multiple HTAs, which can then be used to populate the entire plan itself. This approach can allow one to overcome preparedness barriers, providing an independent, systematic, and robust tool to address the components and ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of their value in the mitigation of the impact of emergencies.

Methodology of emergency medical logistics for multiple epidemic areas in public health emergency.

Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) has brought great disasters to humanity, and its influence continues to intensify. In response to the public health emergencies, prompt relief supplies are key to reduce the damage. This paper presents a method of emergency medical logistics to quick response to emergency epidemics. The methodology includes two recursive mechanisms: (1) the time-varying forecasting of medical relief demand according to a modified susceptible-exposed-infected- Asymptomatic- recovered (SEIAR) epidemic diffusion model, (2) the relief supplies distribution based on a multi-objective dynamic stochastic programming model. Specially, the distribution model addresses a hypothetical network of emergency medical logistics with considering emergency medical reserve centers (EMRCs), epidemic areas and e-commerce warehousing centers as the rescue points. Numerical studies are conducted. The results show that with the cooperation of different epidemic areas and e-commerce warehousing centers, the total cost is 6% lower than without considering cooperation of different epidemic areas, and 9.7% lower than without considering cooperation of e-commerce warehousing centers. Particularly, the total cost is 20% lower than without considering any cooperation. This study demonstrates the importance of cooperation in epidemic prevention, and provides the government with a new idea of emergency relief supplies dispatching, that the rescue efficiency can be improved by mutual rescue between epidemic areas in public health emergency.

The Crosscutting Benefits of Hospital Emergency Preparedness Investments to Daily Operations: A Hospital Senior Leadership Perspective.

Hospitals are an integral part of community resiliency during and after a disaster or emergency event. In addition to community-level planning through healthcare coalitions, hospitals are required to test and update emergency plans to comply with accreditation standards at their own expense. Justifying costs related to investments in emergency preparedness can be a barrier, as these events are relatively rare. Little is known about the crosscutting benefits of investments in daily operations including patient care. This study investigated whether hospital investments in emergency preparedness had a perceived impact on daily operations from a senior leadership perspective. Using a cross-sectional study design, a 39-item survey was emailed and mailed to chief executive officers of all 105 Nebraska hospitals. Most respondents indicated that drills and exercises, staff training, and updating emergency plans had a positive impact on daily operations. A relatively small proportion (≤11%) of respondents indicated that costs of buying decontamination equipment, personal protective equipment, and costs associated with staff training and drills/exercises had a negative impact on daily operations. No differences were noted between rural and urban locations or between hospitals that allocate funds in the budget versus those that do not. The majority of hospitals in our study are likely to continue to invest over the next 3 years, inferring a sincere commitment by hospital senior leadership to continue to invest in emergency preparedness. Future research using longitudinal design and objective measures of investments and daily benefits is needed to support a business case for hospital preparedness.

The Cost and Public Health System Effects of Active Monitoring and Illness Response for Ebola Virus Disease: A Case Evaluation of Georgia.

In August 2014, the World Health Organization declared the Ebola virus disease epidemic in West Africa a public health emergency of international concern. After 2 imported cases of the disease were identified in the United States in autumn 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that all jurisdictions begin active monitoring of travelers at risk of developing Ebola virus disease for 21 days from the last day of a potential exposure to minimize the risk of disease transmission. Here we describe the infrastructure development, monitoring processes, total planned expenditures, and effects on the public health system in Georgia associated with active monitoring and illness response of all travelers from Ebola-affected West African countries from October 2014 to March 2016. We conducted qualitative interviews with Georgia Department of Public Health (GDPH) staff. We identified state active monitoring and illness response infrastructure investments and monitoring activities and state and federal funds spent in both areas. And, we evaluated whether active monitoring and illness response enhanced Georgia's ability to respond to future infectious disease outbreaks. Developing the infrastructure to support the monitoring and response required investment in information technology, training of public health and medical personnel, increasing laboratory capacity, and securing personal protective equipment. Estimated total expenditures were $8.25 million, with 76% spent on infrastructure and 17% on daily monitoring. The GDPH leveraged internal resources and partnerships to implement active monitoring and illness response. Infrastructure investment increased surveillance capacity, strengthened relationships between the GDPH and medical providers, and led to the creation of infectious disease transport and hospital networks. Active monitoring and illness response increased outbreak preparedness, but it warrants comparison with other possible responses to determine its overall value.

The burden, admission, and outcome of COVID-19 in Africa: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the outbreak of coronavirus disease in 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared as pandemic and public health emergency that infected more than 5 million people worldwide at the time of writing this protocol. Strong evidence for the burden, admission, and outcome of COVID-19 has not been published in Africa. Therefore, this protocol will be served as a guideline to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the burden, admission, and outcome of COVID-19 in Africa. Methods: Published and unpublished studies on the burden, admission, and outcome of COVID-19 in Africa and written in any language will be included. Databases (PubMed / MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Google, EMBASE, Web of Science, Microsoft Academic, WHO COVID-19 database, Cochran Library, Africa Wide Knowledge, and Africa Index Medicus) from December 2019 to May 2020 will be searched. Two independent reviewers will select, screen, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. The proportion will be measured using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis will be conducted to manage hetrogeinity. The presence of publication bias will be assessed using Egger's test and visual inspection of the funnel plots. This systematic and meta-analysis review protocol will be reported per the PRISMA-P guidelines. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will be expected to quantify the burden, admission, and outcome of COVID-19 in Africa. Systematic review registration: This protocol was submitted for registration with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in March 2020 and accepted with the registration number: CRD42020179321(https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

COVID-19 pandemic - an African perspective.

The recently emerged novel coronavirus, "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)", caused a highly contagious disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The virus was first reported from Wuhan city in China in December, 2019, which in less than three months spread throughout the globe and was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 11th of March, 2020. So far, the ongoing pandemic severely damaged the world's most developed countries and is becoming a major threat for low- and middle-income countries. The poorest continent, Africa with the most vulnerable populations to infectious diseases, is predicted to be significantly affected by the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, in this review we collected and summarized the currently available literature on the epidemiology, etiology, vulnerability, preparedness and economic impact of COVID-19 in Africa, which could be useful and provide necessary information on ongoing COVID-19 pandemics in the continent. We also briefly summarized the concomitance of the COVID-19 pandemic and global warming.

In and Beyond COVID-19: US Academic Pharmaceutical Science and Engineering Community Must Engage to Meet Critical National Needs.

The supply of affordable, high-quality pharmaceuticals to US patients has been on a critical path for decades. In and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, this critical path has become tortuous. To regain reliability, reshoring of the pharmaceutical supply chain to the USA is now a vital national security need. Reshoring the pharmaceutical supply with old know-how and outdated technologies that cause inherent unpredictability and adverse environmental impact will neither provide the security we seek nor will it be competitive and affordable. The challenge at hand is complex akin to redesigning systems, including corporate and public research and development, manufacturing, regulatory, and education ones. The US academic community must be engaged in progressing solutions needed to counter emergencies in the COVID-19 pandemic and in building new methods to reshore the pharmaceutical supply chain beyond the pandemic.

Financing Common Goods for Health: Core Government Functions in Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management.

In the absence of good data on the costs and comparative benefits from investing in health emergency and disaster risk management (EDRM), governments have been reluctant to invest adequately in systems to reduce the risks and consequences of emergencies and disasters. Yet they spend heavily on their response. We describe a set of key functional areas for investment and action in health EDRM, and calculate the costs needed to establish and operate basic health EDRM services in low- and middle-income countries, focusing on management of epidemics and disasters from natural hazards.We find that health EDRM costs are affordable for most governments. They range from an additional 4.33 USD capital and 4.16 USD annual recurrent costs per capita in low-income countries to 1.35 USD capital to 1.41 USD recurrent costs in upper middle-income countries. These costs pale in comparison to the costs of not acting-the direct and indirect costs of epidemics and other emergencies from natural hazards are more than 20-fold higher.We also examine options for the institutional arrangements needed to design and implement health EDRM. We discuss the need for creating adaptive institutions, strengthening capacities of countries, communities and health systems for managing risks of emergencies, using "all-of-society" and "all-of-state institutions" approaches, and applying lessons about rules and regulations, behavioral norms, and organizational structures to better implement health EDRM. The economic and social value, and the feasibility of institutional options for implementing health EDRM systems should compel governments to invest in these common goods for health that strengthen national health security.

Cost Analysis of 3 Concurrent Public Health Response Events: Financial Impact of Measles Outbreak, Super Bowl Surveillance, and Ebola Surveillance in Maricopa County.

OBJECTIVE: To generate estimates of the direct costs of mounting simultaneous emergency preparedness and response activities to respond to 3 major public health events. DESIGN: A cost analysis was performed from the perspective of the public health department using real-time activity diaries and retrospective time and activity self-reporting, wage and fringe benefit data, and financial records to track costs. SETTING: Maricopa County Department of Public Health (MCDPH) in Arizona. The nation's third largest local public health jurisdiction, MCDPH is the only local health agency serving Maricopa's more than 4 000 000 residents. Responses analyzed included activities related to a measles outbreak with 2 confirmed cases, enhanced surveillance activities surrounding Super Bowl XLIX, and ongoing Ebola monitoring, all between January 22, 2015, and March 4, 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Time data were sought from all MCDPH staff who participated in activities related to any of the 3 relevant responses. In addition, time data were sought from partners at the state health department and a community hospital involved in response activities. Time estimates were received from 128 individuals (response rate 88%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Time and cost to MCDPH for each response and overall. RESULTS: Total MCDPH costs for measles-, Super Bowl-, and Ebola-related activities from January 22, 2015, through March 4, 2015, were $224 484 (>5800 hours). The majority was for personnel ($203 743) and the costliest response was measles ($122 626 in personnel costs). In addition, partners reported working more than 700 hours for these 3 responses during this period. CONCLUSIONS: Funding for public health departments remains limited, yet public health responses can be cost- and time-intensive. To effectively plan for future public health responses, it may be necessary to share experiences and financial lessons learned from similar public health responses. External partnerships represent a key contribution for responses such as those examined. It can be expensive for local public health departments to mount effective responses, especially when multiple responses occur simultaneously.

Performance of Epidemic Preparedness and Response Committees to Disease Outbreaks in Arua District, West Nile Region.

The Epidemic Preparedness and Response Committees (EPPRCs) are at the heart of preventing outbreaks from becoming epidemics by controlling the spread. Evidence-based information regarding factors associated with the performance of EPPRCs in preparedness and response to disease outbreaks is needed in order to improve their performance. A cross-sectional study involving 103 EPPRC members was carried out in Arua district, West Nile region, between the months of July and December 2014. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire, and the chi-square test was used to establish associations. Forty-eight percentage of EPPRC members showed a moderate level of preparedness, and only 39.8% of them had a moderate level of response. The performance drivers of preparedness and response were dependent on presence of a budget (χ2 = 10.281, p=0.002), availability of funds (χ2 = 5.508, p=0.019), adequacy of funds, (χ2 = 11.211, p=0.008), support given by health development partners (χ2 = 19.497, p=0.001), and motivation (χ2 = 20.065, p < 0.001). Further, membership duration (χ2 = 13.776, p=0.001) and respondent cadre (χ2 = 12.538, p=0.005) had a significant association. Based on these findings, there is a big gap in the preparedness and response ability, all of which are dependent on the financial gap to the Committees. To this, funding for preparedness and response is a critical aspect to respond and contain an outbreak.

Federal Funding for Health Security in FY2019.

This article is the latest in an annual series analyzing federal funding for health security programs. We examine proposed funding in the President's Budget Request for FY2019, provide updated amounts for FY2018, and update actual funding amounts for FY2010 through FY2017. Building health security for the nation is the responsibility of multiple agencies in the US federal government, as well as that of state, tribal, territorial, and local governments and the private sector. This series of articles focuses on the federal government's role in health security by identifying health security-related programs in public health, health care, national security, and defense and reporting funding levels for that ongoing work.

Development of emergency food assistance design: a nutritionally balanced, culturally tailored and cost-effective strategy for flood mitigation.

Emergency food assistance forms an integral component of flood mitigation in Malaysia. A cross-sectional survey investigating emergency food assistance among 202 flood victims was conducted and alternative food assistance plan was developed using linear programming targeting post-disaster food requirement scenarios. From the study, the receipt of food aid was significantly associated with ethnicity, household income, residential area and evacuation into temporary shelters. Linear programming analysis identified nutritionally appropriate food assistance targeting mass feeding, emergency food basket, and immediate food requirement for as low as MYR 6.07 (1.55 USD), MYR 7.14 (1.82 USD), and MYR 8.00 (2.04 USD), respectively. This study provides nutritional guidelines for disaster food assistance policy.

Current Emergency Preparedness Resources and Capabilities Among Academic Health Systems in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Although hospital emergency preparedness efforts have been recognized as important, there has been growing pressure on cost containment, as well as consolidation within the US health care system. There is little data looking at what health care emergency preparedness functions have been, could be, or should be centrally coordinated at a system level. METHODS: We developed a questionnaire for academic health systems and asked about program funding, resources provided, governance, and activities. The questionnaire also queried managers' opinions regarding the appropriate role for the system-level resources in emergency response, as well as about what is most helpful at the system-level supporting preparedness. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 97 systems (54%) responded. The most frequently occurring system-wide activities included: creating trainings or exercise templates (75%), promoting preparedness for employees in the system (75%), providing access to specific subject matter experts (73%), and developing specific plans for individual member entities within their system (73%). The top resources provided included a common mass notification system (71%), arranging for centralized contracts for goods and services (71%), and providing subject matter expertise (69%). CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is wide variation in the resources, capabilities, and programs used to support and coordinate system-level emergency preparedness among academic health systems. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:574-577).

Ebola in the Netherlands, 2014-2015: costs of preparedness and response.

The recent epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) resulted in countries worldwide to prepare for the possibility of having an EVD patient. In this study, we estimate the costs of Ebola preparedness and response borne by the Dutch health system. An activity-based costing method was used, in which the cost of staff time spent in preparedness and response activities was calculated based on a time-recording system and interviews with key professionals at the healthcare organizations involved. In addition, the organizations provided cost information on patient days of hospitalization, laboratory tests, personal protective equipment (PPE), as well as the additional cleaning and disinfection required. The estimated total costs averaged €12.6 million, ranging from €6.7 to €22.5 million. The main cost drivers were PPE expenditures and preparedness activities of personnel, especially those associated with ambulance services and hospitals. There were 13 possible cases clinically evaluated and one confirmed case admitted to hospital. The estimated total cost of EVD preparedness and response in the Netherlands was substantial. Future costs might be reduced and efficiency increased by designating one ambulance service for transportation and fewer hospitals for the assessment of possible patients with a highly infectious disease of high consequences.

Funding Public Health Emergency Preparedness in the United States.

The historical precedents that support state and local leadership in preparedness for and response to disasters are in many ways at odds with the technical demands of preparedness and response for incidents affecting public health. New and revised laws and regulations, executive orders, policies, strategies, and plans developed in response to biological threats since 2001 address the role of the federal government in the response to public health emergencies. However, financial mechanisms for disaster response-especially those that wait for gubernatorial request before federal assistance can be provided-do not align with the need to prevent the spread of infectious agents or efficiently reduce the impact on public health. We review key US policies and funding mechanisms relevant to public health emergencies and clarify how policies, regulations, and resources affect coordinated responses.

Public Health Preparedness Funding: Key Programs and Trends From 2001 to 2017.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate trends in funding over the past 16 years for key federal public health preparedness and response programs at the US Department of Health and Human Services, to improve understanding of federal funding history in this area, and to provide context for future resource allocation decisions for public health preparedness. METHODS: In this 2017 analysis, we examined the funding history of key federal programs critical to public health preparedness by reviewing program budget data collected for our annual examination of federal funding for biodefense and health security programs since fiscal year (FY) 2001. RESULTS: State and local preparedness at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention initially received $940 million in FY2002 and resulted in significant preparedness gains, but funding levels have since decreased by 31%. Similarly, the Hospital Preparedness Program within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response was funded at a high of $515 million in FY2003, but funding was reduced by 50%. Investments in medical countermeasure development and stockpiling remained relatively stable. CONCLUSIONS: The United States has made significant progress in preparing for disasters and advancing public health infrastructure. To enable continued advancement, federal funding commitments must be sustained.