健康科学杂志

  • 国际标准期刊号: 1108-7366
  • 期刊 h 指数: 51
  • 期刊引用分数: 10.69
  • 期刊影响因子: 9.13
索引于
  • Genamics 期刊搜索
  • 中国知网(CNKI)
  • 引用因子
  • CINAHL 完整
  • 西马戈
  • 电子期刊图书馆
  • 研究期刊索引目录 (DRJI)
  • EMCare
  • OCLC-WorldCat
  • 大学教育资助委员会
  • 日内瓦医学教育与研究基金会
  • 欧洲酒吧
  • 谷歌学术
  • 夏尔巴罗密欧
  • 秘密搜索引擎实验室
分享此页面

抽象的

The Essential Public Health Services and How They Correspond to the 12 Principles of the Ethical Practice of Public Health in Competing Tuberculosis in South Africa

Yussuf Ikram Mohamed

Although the Essential Public Health Services are noble, there is a growing demand from WHO regional offices and Member States to deliver better conceptual clarity on EPHS in Public health advocacy and strengthened health System planning, discussions on the resilient health system and universal health coverage. This paper critically analyzes the Essential Public Health Services (EPHS) and describes how these correspond to the 12 Principles of the Ethical Practice of Public Health (PEPPH). The 12 PEPPH are discussed along with the 10 Essential Public Health Services which are categories into categories: Assessment which includes, Monitor health status and Diagnoses and investigates health problems, Policy development for Inform and educates, Mobilize communities to address health problems and Develop policies and plans and Assurance which includes the Enforce laws and regulations, Link people to needed health services, Assure a competent health services workforce, Evaluate health services and Conduct research for new innovations and how they correspond to the in 12 PEPPH. Tuberculosis is used as an example to critically analyze the EPHS and their relation to the 12 PEPPH to identify the gap between research and policy in South Africa. Although there are obvious benefits and strengths in aiming for the achievement of the EPHS there is a general consensus about the basic conceptual features of public health its practical boundaries in government, the private sector and throughout society have proven much more challenging. There is a gap in the manner in which these essential services related to the SDGs and universal health coverage. With regard to regional perspectives on EPHS, although there were numerous overlaps of different initiatives from PAHO and CDC, it was clear that there was no unified WHO approach. The WHO regions that have developed their own list of EPHS have done so individually, through regional programmers, at different times over the past there is no representation or adaptation from countries within the African continent and other continents which face systemic public health challenges. There is a limitation to the assessment in developing and implementing of these services on evidence-based public health reorganizations, included an overt relations to a reform process, broad-based collaborative and ownership of national stakeholders, and the availability of technical assistance for both the evaluation and the subsequent prioritization process needed to make specific recommendations. The gap between research and policy is wide in South Africa and continentally. Challenges of this gap are not dealt with in the Essential Public health Services and without addressing such issues the attainment of these essential services is highly handicapped.

免责声明: 此摘要通过人工智能工具翻译,尚未经过审核或验证