Search

The modern access-to-medicines movement grew largely out of the civil-society reaction to the HIV/AIDS pandemic three decades ago. While the movement was successful with regard to HIV/AIDS medications, the increasingly urgent challenge to address access to medicines for noncommunicable diseases has lagged behind-and, in some cases, has been forgotten. In this article we first ask what causes the access gap with respect to lifesaving essential noncommunicable disease medicines and then what can be done to close the gap. Using the example of the push for access to antiretrovirals for HIV/AIDS patients for comparison, we highlight the problems of inadequate global financing and procurement for noncommunicable disease medications, intellectual property barriers and concerns raised by the pharmaceutical industry, and challenges to building stronger civil-society organizations and a patient and humanitarian response from the bottom up to demand treatment. We provide targeted policy recommendations, specific to the public sector, the private sector, and civil society, with the goal of improving access to noncommunicable disease medications globally., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Significant funding of health programs in low-income countries comes from external sources, mainly private donors and national development agencies of high-income countries. How these external funds are allocated remains a subject of ongoing debate, as studies have revealed that external funding may misalign with the underlying disease burden. One determinant of the priorities set by both private donors and development agencies is the perceptions of populations living in high-income countries about which diseases are legitimate for global health intervention. While research has been conducted on the priorities expressed by recipient communities, relatively less has been done to assess those of the donating country. To investigate people's beliefs about the disease burden in high-income countries, we compared publicly available data from U.S. surveys of people's perceptions of the leading causes of death in developing countries against measures of the actual disease burden from the World Health Organization. We found little correlation between the U.S. public's perception and the actual disease burden, measured as either mortality or disability-adjusted life years. While there is potential for reverse causality, so that donor programs drive public perceptions, these findings suggest that increasing the general population's awareness of the true global disease burden could help better align global health funding with population health needs.

What role do students have in global health activities? On one hand, students have much to offer, including innovative ideas, fresh knowledge and perspective, and inspiring energy. At the same time, students lack technical credentials and may drain resources from host communities. Here, we examine the dynamic, contemporary roles of students in global health activities, including health delivery. We focus on 3 themes that guide engagement: (1) fostering an enabling policy environment (eg, toward greater health equity); (2) understanding and working within the local context and governments' needs; and (3) leading bidirectional partnerships. We next study the implications of short-term exposure and long-term engagement programs. We conclude with 4 recommendations on how to better equip students to engage in the next frontier of global health education and future action., (© 2011 Mount Sinai School of Medicine.)

Introduction: To design effective policy and interventions, public health officials must have an accurate and granular picture of the state of multiple chronic conditions (MCC) in their region. The objective of this research is to describe the prevalence and distribution of MCC in New York State. Methods: We performed a secondary data analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) from 2011 through 2016 for New York adults (n = 76,186). We analyzed the self-reported prevalence of individuals having 0, 1, 2, or ≥ 3 chronic conditions by sex, race/ethnicity, age, health insurance type, annual household income, and whether respondents lived in New York City. We also examined the most common condition dyads and triads. Finally, we assessed the prevalence of MCC (2 or more chronic conditions) by county across New York State, and neighborhood within New York City. Results: During 2011–2016, 25.2% of adults in New York State had zero chronic conditions, 24.1% had 1 condition, 18.4% had 2 conditions, and 32.4% had 3 or more. The most prevalent dyad was hypertension and high cholesterol in 17.0% of individuals. The most prevalent triad was hypertension, high cholesterol, and arthritis in 4.5% of individuals. County prevalence of MCC ranged from 42.6% in Westchester County to 66.1% in Oneida County. The prevalence of MCC in New York City neighborhoods ranged from 33.5% in Gramercy Park—Murray Hill to 60.6% in High Bridge—Morrisania. Conclusion: This research contributes to the field’s understanding of multiple chronic conditions and allows policy and public health leaders in New York to better understand the prevalence and distribution of MCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]