Managing Antimicrobial Resistance In Food Production : Conflicts Of Interest And Politics In The Development Of Public Health Policy

Antimicrobial resistance is a growing public health concern and is associated with the over or inappropriate use of antimicrobials in both humans and agriculture. While there has been recognition of this problem on the part of agricultural and public health authorities, there has nonetheless been significant difficulty in translating policy recommendations into practical guidelines. In this paper, we examine the process of public health policy development in Quebec agriculture, with a focus on the case of pork production and the role of food animal veterinarians in policy making. We argue that a tendency to employ strictly techno-scientific risk analyses of antimicrobial use ignores the fundamental social, economic and political realities of key stakeholders and so limits the applicability of policy recommendations developed by government advisory groups. In particular, we suggest that veterinarians’ personal and professional interests, and their ethical norms of practice, are key factors to both the problem of and the solution to the current over-reliance on antimicrobials in food production.

April 2003: Collection Provides Free Public Access to Government Documents

http://digitalcommons.winthrop.edu/dacusfocus/1022/thumbnail.jpg

Scientific knowledge and digital democracy in Brazil: how to assess public health policy debate with applied Scientometrics

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Texas Department of Health organizational structure changes: A reflection of public health policy and agency expansion, September 1, 1946--June 30, 1994

The premise of this study is that changes in the agency's organizational structure reflect changes in government public health policy. Based on this premise, this study tracks the changes in the organizational structure and the overall expansion of the Texas Department of Health to understand the evolution of changing public health priorities in state policy from September 1, 1946 through June 30, 1994, a period of growth and new responsibilities. It includes thirty-seven observations of organizational structure as depicted by organizational charts of the agency and/or adapted from public documents. ^ The major questions answered are, what are the changes in the organizational structure, why did they occur and, what are the policy priorities reflected in these changes in and across the various time periods. ^ The analysis of the study included a thorough review of the organizational structure of the agency for the time-span of the study, the formulation of the criteria to be used in ascertaining the changes, the delineation of the changes in the organizational structure and comparison of the observations sequentially to characterize the change, the discovery of reasons for the structural changes (financial, statutory - federal and state, social and political factors), and the determination of policy priorities for each time period and their relation to the expansion and evolution of the agency. ^ The premise that the organizational structure of the agency and the changes over time reflect government public health policy and agency expansion was found to be true. ^

Effects of congressional modernization laws on public access to innovative medical device technologies

The Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) play key roles in making Class III, medical devices available to the public, and they are required by law to meet statutory deadlines for applications under review. Historically, both agencies have failed to meet their respective statutory requirements. Since these failures affect patient access and may adversely impact public health, Congress has enacted several “modernization” laws. However, the effectiveness of these modernization laws has not been adequately studied or established for Class III medical devices. ^ The aim of this research study was, therefore, to analyze how these modernization laws may have affected public access to medical devices. Two questions were addressed: (1) How have the FDA modernization laws affected the time to approval for medical device premarket approval applications (PMAs)? (2) How has the CMS modernization law affected the time to approval for national coverage decisions (NCDs)? The data for this research study were collected from publicly available databases for the period January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2008. These dates were selected to ensure that a sufficient period of time was captured to measure pre- and post-modernization effects on time to approval. All records containing original PMAs were obtained from the FDA database, and all records containing NCDs were obtained from the CMS database. Source documents, including FDA premarket approval letters and CMS national coverage decision memoranda, were reviewed to obtain additional data not found in the search results. Analyses were conducted to determine the effects of the pre- and post-modernization laws on time to approval. Secondary analyses of FDA subcategories were conducted to uncover any causal factors that might explain differences in time to approval and to compare with the primary trends. The primary analysis showed that the FDA modernization laws of 1997 and 2002 initially reduced PMA time to approval; after the 2002 modernization law, the time to approval began increasing and continued to increase through December 2008. The non-combined, subcategory approval trends were similar to the primary analysis trends. The combined, subcategory analysis showed no clear trends with the exception of non-implantable devices, for which time to approval trended down after 1997. The CMS modernization law of 2003 reduced NCD time to approval, a trend that continued through December 2008. This study also showed that approximately 86% of PMA devices do not receive NCDs. ^ As a result of this research study, recommendations are offered to help resolve statutory non-compliance and access issues, as follows: (1) Authorities should examine underlying causal factors for the observed trends; (2) Process improvements should be made to better coordinate FDA and CMS activities to include sharing data, reducing duplication, and establishing clear criteria for “safe and effective” and “reasonable and necessary”; (3) A common identifier should be established to allow tracking and trending of applications between FDA and CMS databases; (4) Statutory requirements may need to be revised; and (5) An investigation should be undertaken to determine why NCDs are not issued for the majority of PMAs. Any process improvements should be made without creating additional safety risks and adversely impacting public health. Finally, additional studies are needed to fully characterize and better understand the trends identified in this research study.^