A model for use by local public health departments to evaluate pandemic influenza plans

The events of the 1990's and early 2000's demonstrated the need for effective planning and response to natural and man-made disasters. One of those potential natural disasters is pandemic flu. Once defined, the CDC stated that program, or plan, effectiveness is improved through the process of program evaluation. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999) Program evaluation should be accomplished not only periodically, but in the course of routine administration of the program. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999) Accomplishing this task for a "rare, but significant event" is challenging. (Herbold, John R., PhD., 2008) To address this challenge, the RAND Corporation (under contract to the CDC) developed the "Facilitated Look-Backs" approach that was tested and validated at the state level. (Aledort et al., 2006).^ Nevertheless, no comprehensive and generally applicable pandemic influenza program evaluation tool or model is readily found for use at the local public health department level. This project developed such a model based on the "Facilitated Look-Backs" approach developed by RAND Corporation. (Aledort et al., 2006) Modifications to the RAND model included stakeholder additions, inclusion of all six CDC program evaluation steps, and suggestions for incorporating pandemic flu response plans in seasonal flu management implementation. Feedback on the model was then obtained from three LPHD's—one rural, one suburban, and one urban. These recommendations were incorporated into the final model. Feedback from the sites also supported the assumption that this model promotes the effective and efficient evaluation of both pandemic flu and seasonal flu response by reducing redundant evaluations of pandemic flu plans, seasonal flu plans, and funding requirement accountability. Site feedback also demonstrated that the model is comprehensive and flexible, so it can be adapted and applied to different LPHD needs and settings. It also stimulates evaluation of the major issues associated with pandemic flu planning. ^ The next phase in evaluating this model should be to apply it in a program evaluation of one or more LPHD's seasonal flu response that incorporates pandemic flu response plans.^

An analysis of Texas's school based HPV vaccine mandate: A public health risk communication failure: HPVETO!

Genital human papillomavirus (HPV) is of public health concern because persistent infection with certain HPV types can cause cervical cancer. In response to a nationwide push for cervical cancer legislation, Texas Governor Rick Perry bypassed the traditional legislative process and issued an executive order mandating compulsory HPV vaccinations for all female public school students prior to their entrance in the sixth grade. By bypassing the legislative process Governor Perry did not effectively mitigate the risk perception issues that arose around the need for and usefulness of the vaccine mandate. This policy paper uses a social policy paradigm to identify perception as the key intervening factor on how the public responds to risk information. To demonstrate how the HPV mandate failed, it analyzes four factors, economics, politics, knowledge and culture, that shape perception and influence the public's response. By understanding the factors that influence the public's perception, public health practitioners and policy makers can more effectively create preventive health policy at the state level. ^

Planning and implementation efficacy as a determinant of health risk communication outcomes: Case studies of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS)

This study was conducted under the auspices of the Subcommittee on Risk Communication and Education of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP) to determine how Public Health Service (PHS) agencies are communicating information about health risk, what factors contributed to effective communication efforts, and what specific principles, strategies, and practices best promote more effective health risk communication outcomes.^ Member agencies of the Subcommittee submitted examples of health risk communication activities or decisions they perceived to be effective and some examples of cases they thought had not been as effective as desired. Of the 10 case studies received, 7 were submitted as examples of effective health risk communication, and 3, as examples of less effective communication.^ Information contained in the 10 case studies describing the respective agencies' health risk communication strategies and practices was compared with EPA's Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication, since similar rules were not found in any PHS agency. EPA's rules are: (1) Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner. (2) Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts. (3) Listen to the public's specific concerns. (4) Be honest, frank, and open. (5) Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources. (6) Meet the needs of the media. (7) Speak clearly and with compassion.^ On the basis of case studies analysis, the Subcommittee, in their attempts to design and implement effective health risk communication campaigns, identified a number of areas for improvement among the agencies. First, PHS agencies should consider developing a focus specific to health risk communication (i.e., office or specialty resource). Second, create a set of generally accepted practices and guidelines for effective implementation and evaluation of PHS health risk communication activities and products. Third, organize interagency initiatives aimed at increasing awareness and visibility of health risk communication issues and trends within and between PHS agencies.^ PHS agencies identified some specific implementation strategies the CCEHRP might consider pursuing to address the major recommendations. Implementation strategies common to PHS agencies emerged in the following five areas: (1) program development, (2) building partnerships, (3) developing training, (4) expanding information technologies, and (5) conducting research and evaluation. ^

Legal regulation of the food industry as a public health measure

Background. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is an agency of the federal government that is responsible for monitoring and maintaining public health through the regulation of many industries, including food safety. Through the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990, the FDA was granted authority over the implementation and regulation of nutrition labeling on packaged foods. Many nutrients are printed on nutrition labels as well as their percent Daily Values. Research has been undertaken to examine the evidentiary basis the FDA relied upon in making its determinations regarding which nutrients to include on nutrition labels as well as their Daily Values. ^ Methods. Relevant legal policies, scientific studies, and other published literature (either in print or electronic form) were used to collect data. ^ Results. Results demonstrated that the FDA did not employ one single method in its determination of which nutrients to select for inclusion on food labels. The agency relied upon current public heath studies of that time as well as recommendations from the U.S. Surgeon General.^

A report on public and community health personnel : prepared for the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives and the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, United States Senate, as required by section 793 of the Public health service act

"December 7, 1979."

Public health personnel in the United States, 1980 : second report to the Congress of the Secretary of Health and Human Services as required by section 793 of the Public Health Service Act.

Mode of access: Internet.

Lessons learned from public health campaigns and applied to anti-DWI norms development. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration research programs.

Mode of access: Internet.

Public Health Service publication.

Mode of access: Internet.

Informational report - Mine Safety and Health Administration.

Mode of access: Internet.

Scorpions, spiders, and other arthropods of minor public health importance and their controls

Bibliography: p.23-26.

Drug addiction and the U.S. Public Health Service : proceedings of a symposium commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Addiction Research Center at Lexington, Ky. /

Mode of access: Internet.

Public health organization : report of the committee on Public Health Organization /

"Section II Public health service and administration, Hugh S. Cummings, Chairman. Committee on Public Health Organization, E.L. Bishop, Chairman, J.W. Mountin, Secretary."

Proceedings of the Illinois Oral Health Summit and the Illinois Oral Health Plan : Illinois' response to the U.S. Surgeon General's report : Oral Health in America, convened by the Illinois Dept. of Public Health and held at the University of Illinois at Chicago's School of Public Health, Chicago Illinois on September 11, 2001.

Introduction: The major findings and suggested framework for action put forth by the U.S. Surgeon General form the basis for Illinois' plan. Augmenting this foundation is the collective wisdom of citizens, stakeholders and policy makers. The result is a comprehensive vision that can be embraced by all involved in the process. The plan articulates goals, priorities and strategies to improve the oral health of all Illinoisans. Its five policy goals reflect specific priorities and its recommended strategies and action steps suggest how to address each of them. The plan concludes with a call for the establishment of a select committee to monitor and provide guidance in the implementation of the plan.

Moving forward : expanding collaborations between traffic safety and public health /

"Funded by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration grant no. DTNH22-92-AZ-05325."