Dr. Maria Almiron Epidemic Alert and Response Team Communicable Diseases Proyect

1. Public Health Emergency Management in the Region Dr. Maria Almiron Epidemic Alert and Response Team Communicable Diseases Proyect

2. Context – 58 World Health Assembly (WHA 58) Establish specific mandates For member States: • To build, strengthen and maintain the capacities required under the International Health Regulations (2005), and to mobilize the resources necessary for that purpose; • To collaborate actively with each other and WHO in so as to ensure their effective implementation;

3. Context – 58 World Health Assembly (WHA 58) Establish specific mandates For the Organization: • To build and strengthen the capacities of WHO to perform fully and effectively the functions entrusted to it under the International Health Regulations (2005), in particular through strategic health operations that provide support to countries in detection and assessment of, and response to, public health emergencies.

4. Event Management process

5. Event detection • Surveillance system data • Official sources • Unofficial Information Sources • Personal communication • Third Member States • Other UN Agencies

6. IHR reports througth IHR National Focal Points • Events notifications. • Information sharing during an unusual or unexpected event. • Consultation. • Others reports.

7. Risk assessment: decision instrument/ 4 criteria Serious public health impact. Unusual or unexpected. Significant risk of international spread. Significant risk of international travel or trade restriction. Notification: Through the IHR NFP to WHO IHR contact Point. Within 24 hours of assessment of public health information Including health measure implemented in response to those events. Timely, accurate and sufficiently detailed public health information available update on the notified event Event notification: A component of the early detection, alert and notification process.

8. Information-sharing during unexpected or unusual public health events • If a State Party has evidence of • an unexpected or unusual public health event within its territory, • irrespective of origin or source, and • which may constitute a public health emergency of international concern.

9. Consultation and other reports • Consultation: events that not requiring notification in particular those for which there is insufficient information available to complete the decision instrument. State Party may nevertheless • keep WHO advised thereof through the National IHR Focal Point • consult with WHO on appropriate health measures • Otros informes: evidence of events outside their territory that may cause international disease spread.

10. Escalate – Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) Declaration • PHEIC: an extraordinary event which is determined, as provided in these Regulations: • to constitute a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease and • to potentially require a coordinated international response; • Event:means a manifestation of disease or an occurrence that creates a potential for disease.

11. Escalate – Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) Declaration Only the Director-General shall determine a PHEIC, on the basis of : • on the basis of the information received, in particular from the State Party within whose territory an event is occurring; • decission instrument; • advice of the Emergency Committee. • scientific principles and evidence available. • an assessment of the risk to human health.

12. Information channel States Parties Operations Event Management System SEARO EURO PAHO EMRO AFRO WPRO

13. Dissemination of public health information Web site Tecnical bulletins Maps and dinamic reports

14. Recomendation to prevent and reduce the international spread of diseases • Temporary:opinion on appropriate health measure to be implemented temporary and accordingto specific risk in response to a PHEIC. • Standing: opinion onappropriate health measures for routine or periodic application for specific, ongoing public health risks in order to prevent or reduce the international spread of disease and avoid unnecessary interference with international traffic.

15. Event management: a systematic process • To protect the international public health by: • an early detection of events; • an appropriate reaction base on scientific evidence; • Timely, transparent and accurate information sharing to international community; • International assistance - when required- to control the risk at local level and reduce economic, social and human lost.

16. Detection Verification Risk assessment Strategies and Response Operations Prevention and Response to pulic health emergencies

19. Results

20. Substantiated Event recorded in Americas June 2007 – December 2009 2008 2007 2009

21. Annex 2 – Concordance study • 74% of NFPs provided complete responses. • 2. 70% of participants declared that they had applied Annex 2 ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ in the previous 12 months. • For the given scenarios and compared with the relative “gold standard”, NFPs demonstrated, on average, high sensitivity and moderate specificity in their notification decisions. This finding is in contrast with the “real world” experience of recent years. • There was no major difference in concordance scores between subgroups of NFPs formed according to self reported experience with Annex 2, Gross National Income, WHO region, length of professional experience, and number of years in current position.

22. Annex 2 – Concordance study

25. Conclusions • The event management process will adhere to the principles of • Consistency • Timeliness • Technical excellence • Transparency and accountability • The experiencie show that each event is different and not everything can be anticipated to the least detail . • Having a broad and flexible procedure that it is adjusted to one wide range of circumstances facilitates the management of complex emergency. • Established structure for events management. • Clear Identification of roles and responsibilities at all levels. • Organized response 0perations with appropriate logistical support.

26. Conclusions • The risk assessment is ongoing and iterative process; from de detection until the event is close. • The IHR (2005) prescribe a very specific and rigorous process which WHO must undertake before declare a PHEIC. • Information exchange in real time facilitates decision-making. • Most of the registered events were not a PHEIC.

27. Challenges • Strengthening of surveillance and response core capacities is key for event detection and control at local level. • Strengthen the information management and risk communication. • Demonstrate the added value of the timely report and encourage the participation of the IHR National Focal Point in reporting events.