Limitations of recently published review of national influenza pandemic plans in Europe

Nicoll, Anne E.; Kaiser, Rolf

doi:10.2807/esw.11.17.02950-en

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…24 Our evaluation's limitations are similar to those of our previous study. 5,6,25 Although our survey provides only a snapshot, it is based on a similar analysis from a year earlier so that changes and advances can be documented. Our results, as with earlier findings, agree largely with analyses done by other investigators using different methods.…”

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progress and shortcomings in European national strategic plans for pandemic influenza

Mounier-Jack

Jas

Coker

2007

Bull World Health Organ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To repeat and update our previous evaluation (2005) of Europe's national pandemic influenza preparedness plans and assess the progress that has been made. Methods We assessed published national pandemic influenza preparedness plans from the European Union countries, from the two acceding countries (Bulgaria and Romania) and from Norway, Switzerland and Turkey. Plans were eligible for inclusion if formally published before 30 September 2006. We referred to WHO guidelines and used a systematically applied data extraction form. We considered plans in relation to border control measures, antiviral drugs and vaccines. Findings Twenty-nine countries had plans that were included in the analysis, compared with 21 countries in 2005. Substantial differences existed in countries' plans for border control measures, and many plans diverged from WHO guidelines. Likewise, countries' plans on antiviral drugs and vaccines varied and operational planning remained weak. Conclusion Although progress has been made in the completeness of plans, problems remain unsolved regarding national plans' divergence from international recommendations, persisting strategic incoherence and operational limitations in relation to potentially scarce resources. Border control plans also show gaps and inconsistencies, and these are likely to be politically volatile during a pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Progress and shortcomings in European national strategic plans for pandemic influenza

Mounier-Jack

Jas

Coker

2007

Bull World Health Organ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Advice, algorithms and response protocols for investigation and management of possible cases or case clusters have been published, and give details of reporting mechanisms, diagnostic specimens, infection control measures and other containment responses [60][61][62]. Assessments of preparedness plans in Europe and the United States suggest that, at best, most countries remain only moderately prepared for pandemic influenza; furthermore, the degree to which planning at the national level has been translated into increased preparedness at the local level within healthcare facilities remains unknown [63][64][65]. It would be prudent, however, for planners within hospitals to review existing influenza pandemic contingency plans in conjunction with the relevant national preparedness plan, with the aim of ensuring preparedness to provide supportive medical care for influenza cases, prevent transmission of infection and at the same time continue to provide essential medical services to their community.…”

Section: Other Recent and Current Infectious Disease Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological weapons

Ippolito

Puro

Heptonstall

2006

Cell. Mol. Life Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last 2 decades, successive outbreaks caused by new, newly recognised and resurgent pathogens, and the risk that high-consequence pathogens might be used as bioterrorism agents amply demonstrated the need to enhance capacity in clinical and public health management of highly infectious diseases. In this article we review these recent and current threats to public health, whether naturally occurring or caused by accidental or intentional release. Moreover, we discuss some components of hospital preparedness for, and response to, infectious disease of the emergencies in developed countries. The issues of clinical awareness and education, initial investigation and management, surge capacity, communication, and caring for staff and others affected by the emergency are discussed. We also emphasise the importance of improving the everyday practice of infection control by healthcare professionals.

show abstract

“…Recent global scares involving infectious diseases-such as the release of letters containing anthrax spores in the USA in 2001 and the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2002-along with the continuing eff ort to contain highly pathogenic avian infl uenza A (H5N1) virus have highlighted the need to improve preparedness within Europe for emerging public-health threats. [1][2][3][4][5][6] The European Commission is funding several activities intended to improve health security, build capacity, and strengthen preparedness for response to infectious disease emergencies. These ventures include a network of biosafety level 4 (BSL4/P4) laboratories (Euronet-P4), the European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training, and the European Network of Infectious Diseases (EUNID).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for the design and operation of high-level isolation units: consensus of the European Network of Infectious Diseases

Bannister

Puro

Fusco

et al. 2009

The Lancet Infectious Diseases

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients with highly infectious diseases require safe, secure, high-quality medical care with high-level infection control, which may be most effectively delivered by specially trained staff in the setting of a high-level isolation unit (HLIU). The European Network of Infectious Diseases is a European Commission co-funded network of experts in the management of highly infectious diseases from national (or regional) centres designated for the care of this patient population. Participants took a consensus-based approach to develop a framework for the design and operation of HLIUs in Europe, covering clinical care provision, diagnostic services, transport, health and safety, and essential design and construction features, to support planning by health authorities for the safe and effective management of highly infectious diseases and preparedness for infectious disease emergencies in Europe.

show abstract

Limitations of recently published review of national influenza pandemic plans in Europe

Abstract: The influenza pandemic preparedness plans for 21 of 29 European countries, published between January 2002 and November 2005, were recently reviewed and compared against a series of attributes based on the 2005 checklist produced by the World Health Organization

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Progress and shortcomings in European national strategic plans for pandemic influenza

Progress and shortcomings in European national strategic plans for pandemic influenza

Biological weapons

Framework for the design and operation of high-level isolation units: consensus of the European Network of Infectious Diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About