Establishing a community of practice of researchers, practitioners, policy-makers and communities to sustainably manage environmental health risks in Ecuador

The Sustainably Managing Environmental Health Risk in Ecuador project was launched in 2004 as a partnership linking a large Canadian university with leading Cuban and Mexican institutes to strengthen the capacities of four Ecuadorian universities for leading community-based learning and research in areas as diverse as pesticide poisoning, dengue control, water and sanitation, and disaster preparedness. By 2009, train-the-trainer project initiation involved 27 participatory action research Master’s theses in 15 communities where 1200 community learners participated in the implementation of associated interventions. This led to establishment of innovative Ecuadorian-led master’s and doctoral programs, and a Population Health Observatory on Collective Health, Environment and Society for the Andean region based at the Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar. Building on this network, numerous initiatives were begun, such as an internationally funded research project to strengthen dengue control in the coastal community of Machala, and establishment of a local community eco-health centre focusing on determinants of health near Cuenca. Alliances of academic and non-academic partners from the South and North provide a promising orientation for learning together about ways of addressing negative trends of development. Assessing the impacts and sustainability of such processes, however, requires longer term monitoring of results and related challenges.

Equity-focused health impact assessment: a tool to assist policy makers in addressing health inequalities.

In Australasia (Australia and New Zealand) the use of health impact assessment (HIA) as a tool for improved policy development is comparatively new. The public health workforce do not routinely assess the potential health and equity impacts of proposed policies or programs. The Australasian Collaboration for Health Equity Impact Assessment was funded to develop a strategic framework for equity-focused HIA (EFHIA) with the intent of strengthening the ways in which equity is addressed in each step of HIA. The collaboration developed a draft framework for EFHIA that mirrored, but modified the commonly accepted steps of HIA; tested the draft framework in six different health service delivery settings; analysed the feedback about application of the draft EFHIA framework and modified it accordingly. The strategic framework shows promise in providing a systematic process for identifying potential differential health impacts and assessing the extent to which these are avoidable and unfair. This paper presents the EFHIA framework and discusses some of the issues that arose in the case study sites undertaking equity-focused HIA.

Assessing cost-effectiveness in mental health: helping policy-makers prioritize and plan health services

Objective: We assessed, from a health sector perspective, options for change that could improve the efficiency of Australia's current mental health services by directing available resources toward 'best practice' cost-effective services.

Method: We summarize cost-effectiveness results of a range of interventions for depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and anxiety disorders that have been presented in previous papers in this journal. Recommendations for change are formulated after taking into account 'second-filter criteria' of equity, feasibility of implementing change, acceptability to stakeholders and the strength of the evidence. In addition, we estimate the impact on total expenditure if the recommended mental health interventions for depression and schizophrenia are to be implemented in Australia.

Results: There are cost-effective treatment options for mental disorders that are currently underutilized (e.g. cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for depression and anxiety, bibliotherapy for depression, family interventions for schizophrenia and clozapine for the worst course of schizophrenia). There are also less cost-effective treatments in current practice (e.g. widespread use of olanzapine and risperidone in the treatment of established schizophrenia and, within those atypicals, a preference for olanzapine over risperidone). Feasibility of funding mechanisms and training of staff are the main second-filter issues for CBT and family interventions. Acceptability to various stakeholders is the main barrier to implementation of more cost-effective drug treatment regimens. More efficient drug intervention options identified for schizophrenia would cost A$68 million less than current practice. These savings would more than cover the estimated A$36M annual cost of delivering family interventions to the 51% of people with schizophrenia whom we estimated to be eligible and this would lead to an estimated 12% improvement in their health status. Implementing recommended strategies for depression would cost A$121M annually for the 24% of people with depression who seek care currently, but do not receive an evidence-based treatment.

Conclusions: Despite considerable methodological problems, a range of cost-effective and less cost-effective interventions for major mental disorders can be discerned. The biggest hurdle to implementation of more efficient mental health services is that this change would require reallocation of funds between interventions, between disorders and between service providers with different funding mechanisms.

Are policy makers,researchers and educators 'addicted' to the equity failure cycle?’

Introduction : In this paper,  I suggest part of the key to equity progress is to remove our gaze from the equity defined ‘others’ to focus on recognising and transforming the ‘privilege- benefit loop’ (author’s term) that underpins the creation and maintenance of hegemonic Western educational institutions. As a modest contribution to the efforts to address the ‘equity failure cycle’ (author’s term, later expanded on), I suggest three combined approaches (drawing from critical theory and critical pedagogy ) that incorporate and illustrate the interconnected, usually concurrent and complementary political, cultural/institutional and personal levels of understanding, experience and action that I think are necessary ingredients for change. Each of the three levels or domains are inter-related and ‘co-constructive’ and therefore, potentially ‘de-constructive’ .

Job stress as a preventable upstream determinant of common mental disorders: a review for practitioners and policy-makers

There is growing recognition of the important role of mental health in the workforce and in the workplace. At the same time, there has been a rapid growth of studies linking job stress and other psychosocial working conditions to common mental disorders, and a corresponding increase in public concern media attention to job stress and its impact upon worker health and well-being. This article provides a summary of the relevant scientific and medical literature on this topic for practitioners and policy-makers. It presents a primer on job stress concepts, an overview of the evidence linking job stress and common mental disorders, a summary of the intervention research on ways to prevent and control job stress, and a discussion of the strengths and weakness of the evidence base. We conclude that there is strong evidence linking job stress and common mental disorders, and that it is a substantial problem on the population level. On a positive note, however, the job stress intervention evidence also shows that the problem is preventable and can be effectively addressed by a combination of work- and worker-directed intervention.

Courts as healthcare policy-makers: the problem, the responses to the problem and problems in the responses

This article starts by analysing healthcare litigation in Brazil by means of a literature review of articles that contribute with empirical findings on this phenomenon. Based on this review, I argue that health care litigation in Brazil makes the public health system less fair and rational. In the second part of this article, I discuss the three most overarching responses to control the level of litigation and its impact on the public health system: (i) the public hearing held by the Supreme Federal Court and the criteria the court established thereafter; (ii) the recommendations by the National Council of Justice aimed at building courts’ institutional capacity; and (iii) the enactment of the Federal Law 12.401/11, which created a new health technology assessment system. I argue that latter is the best response because it keeps the substantive decisions on the allocation of healthcare resources in the institution that is in the best position to make them. Moreover, this legislation will make the decisions about provision of health treatments more explicit, making easier for courts to control the procedure and the reasons for these decisions.

Instrument for the sensitisation of policy makers about the value of science and technology

Pretende crear conciencia en los encargados de la toma de decisiones de la importancia de integrar los programas de ciencia y tecnologia en los planes nacionales de desarrollo.

Report of the Caribbean ICT Policy Makers Seminar

Includes bibliography

World oil prices: prospects and implications for energy policy-makers in Latin America's oil-deficit countries

Includes bibliography