TY - JOUR
PY - 2018//
TI - The public health emergency management system in China: trends from 2002 to 2012
JO - BMC public health
A1 - Sun, Mei
A1 - Xu, Ningze
A1 - Li, Chengyue
A1 - Wu, Dan
A1 - Zou, Jiatong
A1 - Wang, Ying
A1 - Luo, Li
A1 - Yu, Mingzhu
A1 - Zhang, Yu
A1 - Wang, Hua
A1 - Shi, Peiwu
A1 - Chen, Zheng
A1 - Wang, Jian
A1 - Lu, Yueliang
A1 - Li, Qi
A1 - Wang, Xinhua
A1 - Bi, Zhenqiang
A1 - Fan, Ming
A1 - Fu, Liping
A1 - Yu, Jingjin
A1 - Hao, Mo
SP - e474
EP - e474
VL - 18
IS - 1
N2 - BACKGROUND: Public health emergencies have challenged the public health emergency management systems (PHEMSs) of many countries critically and frequently since this century. As the world's most populated country and the second biggest economy in the world, China used to have a fragile PHEMS; however, the government took forceful actions to build PHEMS after the 2003 SARS outbreak. After more than one decade's efforts, we tried to assess the improvements and problems of China's PHEMS between 2002 and 2012.
METHODS: We conducted two rounds of national surveys and collected the data of the year 2002 and 2012, including all 32 provincial, 139 municipal, and 489 county CDCs. The municipal and county CDCs were selected by systematic random sampling. Twenty-one indicators of four stages (preparation, readiness, response and recovery) from the National Assessment Criteria for CDC Performance were chosen to assess the ten-year trends.
RESULTS: At the preparation stage, organization, mechanisms, workforce, and stockpile across all levels and regions were significantly improved after one decade's efforts. At the readiness stage, the capability for formulating an emergency plan was also significantly improved during the same period. At the response stage, internet-based direct reporting was 98.8%, and coping scores were nearly full points of ten in 2012. At the recovery stage, the capabilities were generally lower than expected.
CONCLUSIONS: Due to forceful leadership, sounder regulations, and intensive resources, China's PHEMS has been improved at the preparation, readiness, and response stages; however, the recovery stage was still weak and could not meet the requirements of crisis management and preventive governance. In addition, CDCs in the Western region and counties lagged behind in performance on most indicators. Future priorities should include developing the recovery stage, establishing a closed feedback loop, and strengthening the capabilities of CDCs in Western region and counties.
Language: en
LA - en SN - 1471-2458 UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5284-1 ID - ref1 ER -