Some trials have evaluated peer support for people with mental ill health in high-income, mainly English-speaking countries, but the quality of the evidence is weak.

To investigate the effectiveness of UPSIDES peer support in high-, middle- and low-income countries.

This pragmatic multicentre parallel-group wait-list randomised controlled trial (registration: ISRCTN26008944) with three measurement points (baseline and 4 and 8 months) took place at six study sites: two in Germany, and one each in Uganda, Tanzania, Israel and India. Participants were adults with long-standing severe mental health conditions. Outcomes were improvements in social inclusion (primary) and empowerment, hope, recovery, health and social functioning (secondary). Participants allocated to the intervention group were offered UPSIDES peer support.

Of the 615 participants (305 intervention group), 337 (54.8%) identified as women. The average age was 38.3 (s.d. = 11.2) years, and the mean illness duration was 14.9 (s.d. = 38.4) years. Those allocated to the intervention group received 6.9 (s.d. = 4.2) peer support sessions on average. Intention-to-treat analysis showed effects on two of the three subscales of the Social Inclusion Scale, Empowerment Scale and HOPE Scale. Per-protocol analysis with participants who had received three or more intervention sessions also showed an effect on the Social Inclusion Scale total score (β = 0.18, P = 0.031, 95% CI: 0.02–0.34).

Peer support has beneficial impacts on social inclusion, empowerment and hope among people with severe mental health conditions across diverse settings. As social isolation is a key driver of mental ill health, and empowerment and hope are both crucial for recovery, peer support can be recommended as an effective component of mental healthcare. Peer support has the potential to move global mental health closer towards a recovery- and rights-based orientation.

This study investigates the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on HTAsiaLink members at the organizational level and provides recommendations for mitigating similar challenges in the future.

A survey was disseminated among HTAsiaLink members to assess the COVID-19 impact in three areas: (i) inputs, (ii) process, and (iii) outputs of the Health Technology Assessment organizations’ (HTAOs) research operations and HTA process in general.

Survey results showed that most HTAOs hired more staff and secured similar or higher funding levels during COVID-19. Nevertheless, some organizations reported high staff turnover. COVID-19-relevant research was prioritized, and most of the organizations had to adapt their research design to meet the needs of policymakers. Time constraints in conducting research and inability to collect primary data were reported as impacts on the research process. Overall, the number of research projects and accessibility of respondents’ publications increased during COVID-19.

Research demand for HTAOs increased during COVID-19 and impacted their research process; however, they demonstrated resilience and adaptability to provide timely evidence for policymakers. With the growing reliance on HTA, HTAOs require adequate financial support, continuous capacity building, collaboration, and partnership, innovative HTA methods, and a pragmatic yet robust, evidence-to-policy process in preparation for future pandemics.

This study aims to assess the public healthcare system by implementing a scorecard in Hatay and Kahramanmaras provinces in Türkiye after the Kahmaranmaras earthquake.

The methodology employing in this study, action research, informs the active interaction between participants who have been involved in disaster risk reduction in the variety of capacities, such as affected local government, emergency medicine department, nursing and care association.

The scorecard application was carried out with 18 participants in Maraş and 22 in Hatay. The scorecard application shows that the items with the lowest scores in Hatay were related to the resilience of public health infrastructure and key health facilities, and the fulfilment of society’s role in disasters. In Maraş, on the other hand, coping with patient surge in disaster, fulfilment of society’s role in disasters, and mental health services in the context of disasters.

With the participation in scorecard workshop, communications between these stakeholders for community public healthcare system can discuss the best way to prepare and collaborate to promote further community disaster risk reduction planning during post-disaster recovery phase.

Nuclear radiological emergencies are classified as low frequency, but high impact events. Radiophobia and fear of deleterious outcomes often evokes hesitancy among responders. This review explored PPE use as a protective mechanism for responders’ safety and identified tools that promote PPE efficacy among first responders during nuclear radiological events.

A systematic literature review was conducted using five scientific databases. More than 5,500 articles were screened to identify literature relating to “PPE use” by first responders during “nuclear radiological events”.

Regulatory agencies such as the IAEA and the NRC assert that PPE, (when worn correctly and consistently) minimizes radiation exposure. Adequate training of first responders emerged as a critical determinant to support appropriate PPE selection and usage during radiological emergencies. This included new employee trainings and refresher courses for existing employees. Pedagogical tools highlighted in the literature included tabletop exercises, safety huddles, trial runs for donning and doffing of new gear (with emphasis on air-fed suits), just-in-time training and virtual reality simulations.

Education on the effective use of PPE is essential to promote self-efficacy among medical staff and other first responders during nuclear radiological events. Comprehensive training will reduce unintended exposures, decrease hesitancy, and maximize employee safety.

Rapid deforestation, urbanization, and biodiversity loss over the last century has changed landscapes and disorientated the climate. This has magnified temperature, wind speed, air quality, and other meteorological variables. For example, the urban heat island effect has resulted in city areas being hotter than nearby rural areas and expanding physical landscapes combined with shifting precipitation patterns has increased flood risks in new locations. The result has been unexpected disruption to healthcare, supply chains, and changes in vector, water, and foodborne disease patterns. To find solutions to this challenge, a transdisciplinary approach is needed to assess and anticipate the impact of floods and other emerging risks on public health systems. The United Nations Public Health System Resilience Scorecard (Scorecard) could provide the process needed for this to occur. This is a reliable, scalable, and versatile tool that has been applied and tested in multiple communities and countries. Attendees to this session will learn about the Scorecard methodology and how it can be applied in different settings, used to build consensus, and employed to inform future resilience actions. Ultimately, providing a framework for maximizing the resilience of public health systems during a time of rapidly shifting environmental, social, and fiscal climates.

Identify the impact floods and other disasters can have on public health systems in non-traditional at-risk areas.

Explore the United Nations Public Health System Resilience Scorecard (Scorecard) and its alignment with the 2030 United Nations agenda.

Understand why a transdisciplinary approach is needed to assess the impact of floods and other emerging risks on public health systems.

Demonstrate how the Scorecard can be applied in multiple communities and countries to identify, rank, and prioritize resilience actions for public health systems.

Interest in nuclear power as a cleaner and alternative energy source is increasing in many countries. Despite the relative safety of nuclear power, large-scale disasters such as the Fukushima Daiichi (Japan) and Chernobyl (Ukraine) meltdowns are a reminder that emergency preparedness and safety should be a priority. In an emergency situation, there is a need to balance the tension between a rapid response, preventing harm, protecting communities, and safeguarding workers and responders. The first line of defense for workers and responders is personal protective equipment (PPE), but the needs vary by situation and location. Better understanding this is vital to inform PPE needs for workers and responders during nuclear and radiological power plant accidents and emergencies.

The aim of this study was to identify and describe the PPE used by different categories of workers and responders during nuclear and radiological power plant accidents and emergencies.

A systematic literature review format following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines was utilized. Databases SCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, INSPEC, and Web of Science were used to retrieve articles that examined the PPE recommended or utilized by responders to nuclear radiological disasters at nuclear power plants (NPPs).

The search terms yielded 6,682 publications. After removal of duplicates, 5,587 sources continued through the systematic review process. This yielded 23 total articles for review, and five articles were added manually for a total of 28 articles reviewed in this study. Plant workers, decontamination or decommissioning workers, paramedics, Emergency Medical Services (EMS), emergency medical technicians, military, and support staff were the categories of responders identified for this type of disaster. Literature revealed that protective suits were the most common item of PPE required or recommended, followed by respirators and gloves (among others). However, adherence issues, human errors, and physiological factors frequently emerged as hinderances to the efficacy of these equipment in preventing contamination or efficiency of these responders.

If worn correctly and consistently, PPE will reduce exposure to ionizing radiation during a nuclear and radiological accident or disaster. For the best results, standardization of equipment recommendations, clear guidelines, and adequate training in its use is paramount. As fields related to nuclear power and nuclear medicine expand, responder safety should be at the forefront of emergency preparedness and response planning.

The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize strategies for strengthening public health system resilience for pandemics, disasters, and other emergencies using a scorecard approach.

The United Nations Public Health System Resilience Scorecard (Scorecard) was applied across 5 workshops in Slovenia, Turkey, and the United States of America. The workshops focused on participants reviewing and discussing 23 questions/indicators. A Likert type scale was used for scoring with zero being the lowest and 5 the highest. The workshop scores were analyzed and discussed by participants to prioritize areas of need and develop resilience strategies. Data from all workshops were aggregated, analyzed, and interpreted to develop priorities representative of participating locations.

Eight themes emerged representing the need for better integration of public health and disaster management systems. These include: assessing community disease burden; embedding long-term recovery groups in emergency systems; exploring mental health care needs; examining ecosystem risks; evaluating reserve funds; identifying what crisis communication strategies worked well; providing non-medical services; and reviewing resilience of existing facilities, alternate care sites, and institutions.

The Scorecard is an effective tool for establishing baseline resilience and prioritizing actions. The strategies identified reflect areas in most need for investment to improve public health system resilience.

The cardiovascular adaptations associated with structured exercise training in Fontan patients remain unknown. We hypothesised that short-term training causes cardiac remodelling and parallel improvement in maximal exercise capacity (VO2 max) in these patients.

Five patients, median age 19.5 (17.6–21.3) years, with a history of Fontan operation meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria, participated in a 3-month training programme designed to improve endurance. Magnetic resonance images for assessment of cardiac function, fibrosis, cardiac output, and liver elastography to assess stiffness were obtained at baseline and after training. Maximal exercise capacity (VO2 max) and cardiac output Qc (effective pulmonary blood flow) at rest and during exercise were measured (C2H2 rebreathing) at the same interval. VO2 max increased from median (IQR) 27.2 (26–28.7) to 29.6 (28.5–32.2) ml/min/kg (p = 0.04). There was an improvement in cardiac output (Qc) during maximal exercise testing from median (IQR) 10.3 (10.1–12.3) to 12.3 (10.9–14.9) l/min, but this change was variable (p = 0.14). Improvement in VO2 max correlated with an increase in ventricular mass (r = 0.95, p = 0.01), and improvement in Quality-of-life inventory (PedsQL) Cardiac scale scores for patient-reported symptoms (r = 0.90, p = 0.03) and cognitive problems (r = 0.89, p = 0.04). The correlation between VO2 max and Qc showed a positive trend but was not significant (r = 0.8, p = 0.08). No adverse cardiac or liver adaptations were noted.

Short-term training improved exercise capacity in this Fontan pilot without any adverse cardiac or liver adaptations. These results warrant further study in a larger population and over a longer duration of time.

NCT03263312, Unique Protocol ID: STU 122016-037; Registration Date: 18 January, 2017.

Due to climate change, many countries are exploring nuclear power as a clean, sustainable, and alternative energy source. However, radiophobia stemming from a history of major accidents at nuclear power plants (most recently Fukushima Daiichi) inhibits the expansion of this industry. In an unlikely event of a large-scale accident, the risks posed to humans are minimal when mitigation measures are followed. This includes appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for first responders, and medical professionals responding to these emergencies. An examination of the PPE recommendations for these scenarios will highlight best practices for minimizing exposures, and the effects of radiation.

A systematic literature review will provide a historical baseline of the PPE worn during previous nuclear power plant events. Additionally, current recommendations for PPE levels in response to these emergencies will be explored. Five databases will be utilized for this study, including PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS.

Many studies examine different types of nuclear radiological exposures, but few focus on nuclear power plant scenarios. More than 5,000 articles emerged from a preliminary survey of the five databases. However, less than 1% of them satisfied the extraction criteria, and reviewed PPE for nuclear power plant accidents. Medical responders caring for “exposed” individuals who present at Emergency Departments have minimal exposure once they’re decontaminated, and everyday PPE is maintained. However, data on PPE recommendations for on-site response remains unexplored. Airtight suits and full-face respirators emerged as industry gold standard for protection, but a closer examination of these types of suits, and responders' self-efficacy utilizing the gear would clarify their actual protective qualities.

While nuclear power plant accidents do not occur often, many remain fearful of their impact. Maintaining proper PPE (including respiratory habiliment) for event responders is one way to minimize the adverse health effects of these nuclear radiological exposures.

Vulnerable populations were the most impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. This included those with underlying health conditions, self-employed, low-income, people with limited access to health care, and the elderly. To capture these lessons and identify resilience actions, the Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management (Health EDRM) Framework was used to guide the application of the Public Health System Resilience Scorecard (Scorecard).

This study was conducted in Australia, Bangladesh, Japan, Slovenia, Turkey, and the United States. Participants included emergency professionals, doctors, nurses, environmental health specialists, researchers, and government officials. The Scorecard was used to rank the level of preparedness from 0-5 (5 the highest) for the public health system resilience indicators. Following the individual workshops, recommendations were collated and interpreted to develop consolidated priority actions.

The priority actions related to surge capacity, mental health, ecosystems, societal needs, and high-risk populations. To address surge capacity issues, determining whether existing disaster structures have the capacity to provide support for hospitals during patient surges. This could include services that enable telehealth and primary health care to support hospitals during a crisis. Mental health services at the local government level should be evaluated and awareness of ecosystem risks in urban and rural areas needs to increase. Strategies for achieving reciprocal trust are required to enable uptake of public health information, and the extent at which pre-existing chronic health issues are likely to exacerbate needs to be understood and addressed.

This study revealed several areas for strengthening public health system resilience. Priority actions relate to addressing needs relating to surge capacity, mental health, ecosystems, societal needs, and high-risk populations. This serves as a framework for transforming public health systems to become more adaptive, flexible, and focused on enabling societies to function at the highest possible level when responding to a disaster or pandemics.