Derek Pierre Christie

The role of health impact assessment in Phase V of the Healthy Cities European Network

Health impact assessment (HIA) is a prospective decision-making aid tool that aims to improve the quality of policies, programmes or projects through recommendations that promote health. It identifies how and through which pathways a decision can impact a wide range of health determinants and seeks to define the distribution of effects within populations, thereby raising the issue of equity. HIA was introduced to the WHO European Healthy Cities Network as one of its four core themes during the Phase IV (2004-08). Here we present an evaluation of the use of HIA during Phase V (2009-13), where HIA was linked with the overarching theme of health and health equity in all local policies and a requirement regarding capacity building. The evaluation was based on 10 case studies contributed by 9 Healthy Cities in five countries (France, Hungary, Italy, Spain and the UK). A Realist Evaluation framework was used to collect and aggregate data obtained through three methods: an HIA factors analysis, a case-study template analysis using Nvivo software and a detailed questionnaire. The main conclusion is that HIA significantly helps promote Health in All Policies (HiAP) and sustainability in Healthy Cities. It is recommended that all Healthy City candidates to Phase VI (2014-18) of the WHO Healthy Cities European Network effectively adopt HIA and HiAP.

Implementation and impact of anti-smoking interventions in three prisons in the absence of appropriate legislation

OBJECTIVE To assess the acceptability and impact of anti-smoking policies in three prisons in Switzerland. METHODS A before-after intervention study in A) an open prison for sentenced prisoners, B) a closed prison for sentenced prisoners, and C) a prison for pretrial detainees. Prisoners and staff were surveyed before (2009, n=417) and after (2010-2011, n=228) the interventions. Medical staff were trained to address tobacco dependence systematically in prisoners. In prison A, a partial smoking ban was extended. No additional protection against second-hand smoke was feasible in prisons B and C. RESULTS In prison A, more prisoners reported receiving medical help to quit smoking in 2011 (20%) than in 2009 (4%, p=0.012). In prison A, prisoners and staff reported less exposure to second-hand smoke in 2011 than in 2009: 31% of prisoners were exposed to smoke at workplaces in 2009 vs 8% in 2011 (p=0.001); in common rooms: 43% vs 8%, (p<0.001). No changes were observed in prisons B and C. CONCLUSIONS Reinforcement of non-smoking rules was possible in only one of the three prisons but had an impact on exposure to tobacco smoke and medical help to quit. Implementing anti-smoking policies in prisons is difficult in the absence of appropriate legislation.

The 2014–2015 Ebola outbreak in West Africa: Hands On

The International Consortium for Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) organises a biannual conference (ICPIC) on various subjects related to infection prevention, treatment and control. During ICPIC 2015, held in Geneva in June 2015, a full one-day session focused on the 2014–2015 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa. This article is a non-exhaustive compilation of these discussions. It concentrates on lessons learned and imagining a way forward for the communities most affected by the epidemic. The reader can access video recordings of all lectures delivered during this one-day session, as referenced. Topics include the timeline of the international response, linkages between the dynamics of the epidemic and infection prevention and control, the importance of community engagement, and updates on virology, diagnosis, treatment and vaccination issues. The paper also includes discussions from public health, infectious diseases, critical care and infection control experts who cared for patients with EVD in Africa, in Europe, and in the United Sates and were involved in Ebola preparedness in both high- and low-resource settings and countries. This review concludes that too little is known about the pathogenesis and treatment of EVD, therefore basic and applied research in this area are urgently required. Furthermore, it is clear that epidemic preparedness needs to improve globally, in particular through the strengthening of health systems at local and national levels. There is a strong need for culturally sensitive approaches to public health which could be designed and delivered by social scientists and medical professionals working together. As of December 2015, this epidemic killed more than 11,000 people and infected more than 28,000; it has also generated more than 17,000 survivors and orphans, many of whom face somatic and psychological complications. The continued treatment and rehabilitation of these people is a public health priority, which also requires an integration of specific medical and social science approaches, not always available in West Africa.

HIA in Switzerland: strategies for achieving Health in All Policies

Summary The purpose of this article is to review the status of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Switzerland and assess whether HIA can be used to implement Health in All Policies (HiAP) in this highly decentralized country. The methods include expert opinion and an extensive literature review, as well as targeted interviews with key informers in the cantons of Geneva, Jura and Ticino. HIA has been implemented successfully since the early 2000s in Switzerland. However, integration has been heterogeneous with only a few cantons taking the lead. Integration of HIA at the federal level was attempted in 2012 but failed due to resistance from a pro-business lobby. HIA in Switzerland has the potential to contribute to HiAP, but success depends on a wider dissemination of HIA and on some form of integration at the national level. In this respect, a ‘bottom-up’ approach based on inter-cantonal collaborations appears more promising than the ‘top-down’ federal level approach.

Utilization and Impact of Cigarette Pack Covers Illustrated with Antismoking Messages

The authors tested whether smokers would use cigarette pack covers illustrated with antismoking messages. In 2001, visitors to a smoking cessation Web site ordered cigarette pack covers and answered a follow-up questionnaire 52 days later. Participants received by mail cardboard boxes designed to contain cigarette packs and illustrated with antismoking messages. Participants were 393 smokers living in France, Belgium, and Switzerland. Participants used their boxes for 21 days out of a possible 28 days, and 31% were still using them at follow-up. Almost one third (32%) said that the boxes often prompted discussions about smoking. The boxes that were submitted to pretests were preferred to the boxes that were not pretested. The authors concluded that the boxes were welcomed by smokers and enabled the display of antismoking messages for 3 weeks in their immediate environments. The intervention had no impact on smoking cessation, but this was not its primary objective.

Is HIA the most effective tool to assess the impact on health of climate change mitigation policies at the local level? A case study in Geneva, Switzerland

This study aims to understand how the health dimension is integrated into four impact assessment tools used in Geneva, Switzerland: environmental impact assessment (EIA), strategic environmental assessment (SEA), sustainability assessment (SA) and health impact assessment (HIA). We have chosen as a case study greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction policies chosen by the city of Geneva. The methodological approach consists in analysing EIA, SEA, SA and HIA conducted on three projects in three topic areas: urban planning, heating and transportation. These projects are: a complex urbanisation plan in an urban neighbourhood in Geneva (the Gare des Eaux-Vives project), a sustainable transportation plan for a central district in Geneva (the St-Gervais transportation project) and a strategy to encourage the City’s employees to use sustainable transport for local business travel. The results show some shortcomings in the consideration of health in SEA, EIA and SA. This work highlights a narrow vision of health in SEA and EIA, limiting itself to a review of the effects of projects on the determinants of the physical environment as required by the legislation relating to these tools. EIA does not require the integration of the health dimension. As for SA, our research found that health is treated much more superficially than in HIA and primarily through the analysis of ‘health and safety’ criteria. It appears from this work that HIA is the tool which provides the most elaborate assessment, compared to SA, SEA or EIA, of the consequences for health of the GHG reduction policies chosen by the local decision-makers of a city. However, our study suggests that the HIA community should identify the situations in which HIA should be carried out and in which cases it is better to include health issues within an integrated analysis.

The inclusion of health in impact assessments: a case study in Geneva, Switzerland

Abstract The aim of this study is to investigate the integration of the health dimension within existing impact assessments such as environmental impact assessment (EIA), strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and sustainability assessment (SA). This work focuses on the canton of Geneva (Switzerland) and was carried out using the following methodology: a review of the legal texts and the guidelines that underpin the design and methodology of IAs; an analysis of the application of these tools in 37 case studies (11 SEAs and 20 EIAs conducted in Geneva as well as 6 SAs undertaken at national level); and conducting semi-structured interviews with selected professionals who participated in these case studies. Our study reveals serious shortcomings in the consideration of health within the investigated environmental assessments, limited to a simple review of the effects of projects on the determinants of the physical environment as required by the Swiss or local (Geneva) legislations. Regarding SA, our research finds that health is treated superficially and primarily through the analysis of ‘health and safety’ criteria.

Migrant and refugee populations: a public health and policy perspective on a continuing global crisis

The 2015–2017 global migratory crisis saw unprecedented numbers of people on the move and tremendous diversity in terms of age, gender and medical requirements. This article focuses on key emerging public health issues around migrant populations and their interactions with host populations. Basic needs and rights of migrants and refugees are not always respected in regard to article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 23 of the Refugee Convention. These are populations with varying degrees of vulnerability and needs in terms of protection, security, rights, and access to healthcare. Their health status, initially conditioned by the situation at the point of origin, is often jeopardised by adverse conditions along migratory paths and in intermediate and final destination countries. Due to their condition, forcibly displaced migrants and refugees face a triple burden of non-communicable diseases, infectious diseases, and mental health issues. There are specific challenges regarding chronic infectious and neglected tropical diseases, for which awareness in host countries is imperative. Health risks in terms of susceptibility to, and dissemination of, infectious diseases are not unidirectional. The response, including the humanitarian effort, whose aim is to guarantee access to basic needs (food, water and sanitation, healthcare), is gripped with numerous challenges. Evaluation of current policy shows insufficiency regarding the provision of basic needs to migrant populations, even in the countries that do the most. Governments around the world need to rise to the occasion and adopt policies that guarantee universal health coverage, for migrants and refugees, as well as host populations, in accordance with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. An expert consultation was carried out in the form of a pre-conference workshop during the 4th International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) in Geneva, Switzerland, on 20 June 2017, the United Nations World Refugee Day.