Implications from COVID-19 for future pandemic global health governance

BACKGROUND

Limitations of current global health governance revealed during the COVID-19 pandemic can inform the ongoing deliberations of an international treaty on pandemics.

OBJECTIVES

To report on WHO definitions for governance and the enforcement of treaties in the context of a proposed international treaty on pandemics.

SOURCES

This narrative review was based on keyword searches related to public health, global health governance, and enforcement in PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar. Snowballing for additional articles followed the keyword search review.

CONTENT

WHO lacks a consistent definition of global health governance. Moreover, in its current state, the proposed international treaty on pandemics lacks articulated compliance, accountability, or enforcement mechanisms. Findings reveal that humanitarian treaties often fail to achieve their aims absent clear enforcement mechanisms. The proposed international treaty on public health is garnering a range of perspectives. Decision-makers should evaluate whether a globally aligned definition of global health governance is needed. Decision-makers should also consider whether the proposed international treaty on pandemics should be opposed if it lacks sufficiently clear compliance, accountability, and enforcement mechanisms.

IMPLICATIONS

To our knowledge, this narrative review is believed to be the first of its kind to search scientific-oriented databases regarding governance and international pandemic treaties. The review includes several findings that advance the literature. These findings, in turn, reveal two key implications for decision-makers. First, whether an aligned definition for governance addressing compliance, accountability, and enforcement mechanisms is needed. Second, whether a draft treaty lacking enforcement mechanisms should be approved.

A global action agenda for turning the tide on fatty liver disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Fatty liver disease is a major public health threat due to its very high prevalence and related morbidity and mortality. Focused and dedicated interventions are urgently needed to target disease prevention, treatment, and care.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We developed an aligned, prioritized action agenda for the global fatty liver disease community of practice. Following a Delphi methodology over 2 rounds, a large panel (R1 n = 344, R2 n = 288) reviewed the action priorities using Qualtrics XM, indicating agreement using a 4-point Likert-scale and providing written feedback. Priorities were revised between rounds, and in R2, panelists also ranked the priorities within 6 domains: epidemiology, treatment and care, models of care, education and awareness, patient and community perspectives, and leadership and public health policy. The consensus fatty liver disease action agenda encompasses 29 priorities. In R2, the mean percentage of "agree" responses was 82.4%, with all individual priorities having at least a super-majority of agreement (> 66.7% "agree"). The highest-ranked action priorities included collaboration between liver specialists and primary care doctors on early diagnosis, action to address the needs of people living with multiple morbidities, and the incorporation of fatty liver disease into relevant non-communicable disease strategies and guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus-driven multidisciplinary fatty liver disease action agenda developed by care providers, clinical researchers, and public health and policy experts provides a path to reduce the prevalence of fatty liver disease and improve health outcomes. To implement this agenda, concerted efforts will be needed at the global, regional, and national levels.

Integrating social nutrition principles into the treatment of steatotic liver disease

Ivancovsky-Wajcman et al. outline the need for a holistic preventive hepatology approach, involving social nutrition and social prescribing, to address the public health threat of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). They argue that this will facilitate individuals’ engagement in behavioural modifications to treat MASLD.

A global research priority agenda to advance public health responses to fatty liver disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

An estimated 38% of adults worldwide have non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). From individual impacts to widespread public health and economic consequences, the implications of this disease are profound. This study aimed to develop an aligned, prioritised fatty liver disease research agenda for the global health community.

METHODS

Nine co-chairs drafted initial research priorities, subsequently reviewed by 40 core authors and debated during a three-day in-person meeting. Following a Delphi methodology, over two rounds, a large panel (R1 n = 344, R2 n = 288) reviewed the priorities, via Qualtrics XM, indicating agreement using a four-point Likert-scale and providing written feedback. The core group revised the draft priorities between rounds. In R2, panellists also ranked the priorities within six domains: epidemiology, models of care, treatment and care, education and awareness, patient and community perspectives, and leadership and public health policy.

RESULTS

The consensus-built fatty liver disease research agenda encompasses 28 priorities. The mean percentage of 'agree' responses increased from 78.3 in R1 to 81.1 in R2. Five priorities received unanimous combined agreement ('agree' + 'somewhat agree'); the remaining 23 priorities had >90% combined agreement. While all but one of the priorities exhibited at least a super-majority of agreement (>66.7% 'agree'), 13 priorities had <80% 'agree', with greater reliance on 'somewhat agree' to achieve >90% combined agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting this multidisciplinary consensus-built research priorities agenda can deliver a step-change in addressing fatty liver disease, mitigating against its individual and societal harms and proactively altering its natural history through prevention, identification, treatment, and care. This agenda should catalyse the global health community's efforts to advance and accelerate responses to this widespread and fast-growing public health threat.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

An estimated 38% of adults and 13% of children and adolescents worldwide have fatty liver disease, making it the most prevalent liver disease in history. Despite substantial scientific progress in the past three decades, the burden continues to grow, with an urgent need to advance understanding of how to prevent, manage, and treat the disease. Through a global consensus process, a multidisciplinary group agreed on 28 research priorities covering a broad range of themes, from disease burden, treatment, and health system responses to awareness and policy. The findings have relevance for clinical and non-clinical researchers as well as funders working on fatty liver disease and non-communicable diseases more broadly, setting out a prioritised, ranked research agenda for turning the tide on this fast-growing public health threat.

Physicians' Use of Digital Health Interventions in the Management of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

Globally, the use of digital health interventions (DHIs) is expanding, along with growing scientific evidence of their effectiveness. Given the high and increasing prevalence of noncommunicable liver disease, we surveyed 295 physicians across Spain about their knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, practices, and access with regard to DHIs for patient care and in particular for liver diseases, including nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Physicians reported high familiarity with DHIs, although most had not recommended them in patient care. Addressing concerns, including limited available time, evidence of effectiveness, education, training, and access may contribute to an increased uptake of these technologies.

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.