Reach Us +44-1522-440391
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Abstract

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

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.


Author(s):

Yussuf Ikram Mohamed



Abstract | Full-Text | PDF

Share this  Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  Google+
Flyer image

Abstracted/Indexed in

  • ProQuest
  • Google Scholar
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)
  • CiteFactor
  • CINAHL Complete
  • Scimago
  • Electronic Journals Library
  • Directory of Research Journal Indexing (DRJI)
  • EMCare
  • WorldCat
  • University Grants Commission
  • Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research
  • Secret Search Engine Labs