Function or outcomes based performance for public health systems?

This commentary considers the merits of exploring different public health delivery systems among developed countries to consider which models are most effective. It challenges the conventional focus on delivery of services or functions and asks why we are not primarily interested in delivery of better public health outcomes for our populations. Achieving these outcomes requires the commitment of all sectors of our respective communities and the deployment of a range of delivery systems tailored to the national political and cultural context.     

COVID-19: not the time for health economists? A plea for more proactive health economic involvement

The European Journal of Health Economics -     

Jabbing together? The complementarity between social capital,formal public health rules,and COVID-19 vaccine rates in the United States

COVID-19 vaccine rates provide a unique opportunity to explore vaccine hesitancy and potential interactions between social capital and individual, normative values, namely for public health and/or personal freedom. While economists and public health scholars realize the independent effects social capital and stringent public health rules have on prevalence and mortality rates, few recognize how these factors influence vaccination rates. We advance this literature with a novel framework to analyze these interactions. With county-level data on COVID-19 vaccinations, social capital, and measures of the values people have for personal freedom and public health, we find that vaccination rates depend on individual values, the level of social capital, and the interaction between the two. Social capital mediates the values people hold dear, which can influence vaccination rates in positive and negative ways. Our results are robust to the inclusion of relevant controls and under multiple specifications. These results suggest that individuals and the communities people enter into and exit out of play an important role in decisions to vaccinate, which are independent of formal, governmental public health measures.     

Economics, public health and health care purchasing: reinventing the wheel?

In this paper, a framework for using economics in health care priority setting is outlined. This framework is known as programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). Programme budgeting involves an assessment of how health care resources are currently distributed amongst programmes and within programmes. Such data can be used along with other information on local needs to decide on the main areas of change in service delivery. As resources are fixed, areas of change requiring more resources will be funded from service reductions within the same programme or within another programme. Candidates for more resources should be compared with each other and with candidates for service reduction to determine whether and what changes should go ahead. This involves 'marginal analysis' of costs and benefits of the candidates. In the paper, the problems with implementing this approach are outlined and the contribution of the other papers in the volume described.     

Psychosocial factors and public health: a suitable case for treatment?

Adverse psychosocial exposure or "misery" is associated with physical disease. This association may not be causal. Rather it may reflect issues of reverse causation, reporting bias, and confounding by aspects of the material environment typically associated with misery. A non-causal relation will not form the basis of effective public health interventions. This may be why psychosocial interventions have, so far, showed little effect on objective physical health outcomes. This paper reviews evidence for the "psychosocial hypothesis" and suggests strategies for clarifying these issues. It concludes that, although misery is clearly a bad thing as it erodes people's quality of life, there is little evidence that psychosocial factors cause physical disease. In the absence of better evidence, suggestions that psychosocial interventions are needed to improve population physical health, in both absolute and relative terms, seem premature.     

Systematic health, environment and safety activities: do they influence occupational environment, behaviour and health?

This study investigated the relationships between systematic health, environment and safety (HES) activities (as defined by Norway's Internal Control Regulation), the working environment, and workers' health-related behaviour and health. A questionnaire on systematic HES activities was answered by 237 managers of motor vehicle repair garages. A further questionnaire, on the working environment, health-related behaviour and health, was answered by workers (n = 2174) from the same garages. Using regression analysis, systematic HES activities were positively and significantly correlated with the following separate outcome variables, measured at an individual level: satisfaction with HES activities, physical working environment, social support, HES-related management support, health-related support, and control and workers' participation in activities related to occupational health. Workers at garages with systematic HES activities reported fewer musculoskeletal symptoms. Firm conclusions on the direction of causality are difficult to draw because of the cross-sectional design.     

Has public health messaging during the COVID-19 pandemic reflected local risks to health?: A content analysis of tweeting practices across Canadian geographies

During the COVID-19 pandemic, public health agencies and decision-makers have used social media to disseminate information, encourage changes to behaviour and promote community supports and resources. Their communications have served to educate the public on risks and initiate the widespread adoption of public health measures to ‘flatten the curve’. We conducted a content analysis of COVID-19 Tweets by Canadian public health accounts during the first 6 months of the pandemic to explore differences in Tweeting practices by geography and identify opportunities to improve risk communication. We found that Canadian public health accounts in particular geographic settings did not always apply best practices for health communication. Tweeting practices differed considerably between jurisdictions with varying burdens of COVID-19. Going forward, Tweets authored by public health accounts that promote behaviour change and community-building ought to be utilized whenever risks to health are high to reflect an increase in disease transmission requiring intervention. Our study highlights the need for public health communicators to deliver messaging that is relevant for the levels of risk that their audiences are encountering in a given geographic context.     

An occupational health and safety intervention research agenda for production agriculture: Does safety education work?

It is clear that agriculture has not kept pace with other hazardous industries in reducing its injury rate. For example, between 1960 and 1990 the work death rate for agriculture decreased only 28% while the work death rates decreased 65% for mining and 55% for construction [Purschwitz (1992)]. A national conference in Iowa in 1988 came to the forceful conclusion that “America's most productive workforce was being systematically liquidated by an epidemic of occupational disease and traumatic death and injury” [NCASH (1988)]. In 1991, the nation's top public health officer, the U.S. Surgeon General, convened a conference titled “FarmSafe 2000—A National Coalition for Local Action,” to formally address agricultural safety and health issues. Importantly, conferees recognized that preventing injury and disease was superior to trying to rehabilitate people after an injury occurred. But does participation in farm safety and health educational programs lead to a reduction in risk of injury from farm work? Questions are being raised about the value of farm safety and health educational information, campaigns, programs, and related activities. The questions have identified a critical gap in the literature of farm safety and health education. There is currently no good evidence demonstrating that farm safety and health education, campaigns, programs, or related activities lead to a relatively stable reduction of risk on the farm. In other words, do farmers and their families actually put to use, in a relatively permanent or stable manner, the educational information regarding elimination, reduction, or control of physical hazards and the modification of work behavior that may cause injury? © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.