OIC/5th ICHM/2015/Doc.5
Fifth Session of the
Islamic Conference of Health Ministers
Concept Paper
Panel Discussion II: Preparedness and Response
in Health Emergencies
Istanbul, Republic of Turkey
17 – 19 November 2015
1
OIC/5TH ICHM/2015/DOC.5
Concept Paper
Panel Discussion II: Preparedness and Response in Health Emergencies
I. Background and Rationale
Disaster is described as “A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society
involving widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which
exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources” in
United Nations terminology. Such incidents may be classified in three main headings namely;
a) Natural Disasters,
b) Man Made Disasters,
c) Na-Tech Disasters (technological disasters triggered by natural causes)
Abovementioned types of disasters can cause irreversible damages on health as well on
economical, intellectual and developmental gains of states and their people (especially on low
income levels). Limiting the effects of disasters, risk mitigation and risk management capacities
should be established and emergency response procedures must be in place.
The OIC Member States have been facing variety of health threats arises from disasters such as
typhoons, monsoon rains, earthquakes, tsunamis, droughts, outbreaks to civil unrest, armed
conflicts and war. Many of the Member States are lacking capabilities to mitigate, manage and
respond to these risks and these vulnerabilities puts all countries and OIC in danger in terms of
sustaining the progress achieved in previous decades. With increasing frequency and impacts of
disasters organizational solution to responding emergencies becomes even more crucial to
protect and promote health of Ummah.
Setting-up of response procedures may not be enough since systems can face with overflow of
threats, unless necessary preparedness capacities are built to monitor existing situation and
mobilize equipments, funds, personnel to the areas and communities in need. Understanding
comprehensive structure of disasters and responding effectively to them is a challenge itself and
countries must be open to take necessary steps, cooperate with other entities and learn from best
practices.
A key lesson learnt in this manner is building a system prepared for all hazards and health risks
from local to international level. It is indispensable to overcome risks and threats in facing
disasters instead of stand-by systems since the spread of communicable diseases can heavy
losses and threaten economy, security and peace as its seen in the recent Ebola crisis.
Multi-sectoral and cooperative efforts are desperately needed to response to emergencies. Even
though the health is covered in emergency response operations, and relevant health authorities
are part of them, the need to strengthen measures for protection of most valuable asset, human
health, is obvious. Response systems must address challenges in local, regional, country-wide
and international level. These systems must prioritize rehabilitation, construction and recovery
to develop mitigation and prevention capacities to avoid facing same consequences later on.
This is one of the reasons for placing health on the core of response operations, not only to limit
losses but to preserve intellectual capacity and experiences learnt from such grievous incidents.
Global Status and Trends
2
Since there’s no worldwide agency that specifically handles preparedness, response and
recovery all together, it creates a fragmentation for resources pools. Some UN agencies and
other donors are main contributors in situation related to health where international funding is
needed to compliment technical and implementation support. Other bilateral contributors and
states also makes donations to catalyze response in short term by supporting human resources,
provision of medical goods etc.
International Health Regulations (IHR), a legal instrument binding for the Member States of
WHO is one of the good examples since it interlinks both preparedness and response. IHR’s
main aim is to institute minimum core capacities in Member States for minimization of public
health emergencies of international concern. With it’s almost fifty year history since adoption
of first IHR in 1969, many countries are lacking to have necessary capacities due to different
reasons. IHR core capacities contains 13 main areas which varies from human resource to,
preparedness and response and even a gap in area can cause catastrophic damages.
Two specific disease cases can be evaluated to understand the effectiveness of IHR. First one is
MERS-CoV, a disease mainly seen on OIC Member States. With the implementation of strict
and effective prevention and control measures in collaboration with international organizations
and Saudi Arabian authorities (especially on points of entry, which is the one of the main
concern area of IHR) virus has been stopped from taking lives even in high risk periods such as
Hajj. In future, with the concentration of efforts on control disease’s spread pattern can be
changed and international spread risk can be minimized.
Another example is the ebola virus outbreak. Combination of inadequate IHR capacities with
weak health systems and inefficient response, transformed a disease which should be eradicated
decades ago turned into an international outbreak damaging every aspect of social and
international affairs. Low surveillance capacities, weak international collaboration, arguable
control strategies and insufficient response capacity can be determined as the main causes of the
outbreak. Only positive outcome of the crisis is the positive momentum and in taking
worldwide measures and strong emphasis on IHR’s importance for prevention and management
of public health emergencies. In line with World Health Assembly resolutions, installing core
IHR capacities may be considered as one of the milestones to secure country and global health.
These efforts are in line with the Declarations endorsed in 1st and 4th Islamic Conferences of
Health Ministers (ICHM) in Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta, since emphasis is made on the
implementation of IHRs in OIC Member States with both Declarations.
Also IHR is subject of the studies made by WHO in the light of recent ebola crisis in terms of
effectivity, bindingnes and monitoring. Existing mechanisms such as Global Outbreak And
Response Network (GOARN) has been revitalized and contingency fund is created for
provision of necessary resources to respond in timely and effective manner to emergencies. To
respond in time to emergencies with required human resources capacity, global emergency
health workforce is being comprised to operate on field and to be formed via the stand by
Agreements with international actors.
Work Done By OIC
One of the six thematic areas of the SHPA is on “Emergencies Health Response and
Intervention” Sudan is the lead country for the implementation of the thematic area. With the
implementation of SHPA 2014-2023 with it’s foreseen timeline, performance indicators and
expected outcomes such as the mobilization of financial resources to increase laboratory
capacities, resilience and response capacities, access to safe water and sanitation. With the
3
OIC/5TH ICHM/2015/DOC.5
implementation of SHPA it is expected member states are equipped with the necessary
capacities to develop and implement health emergency preparedness and response policies
(national and cross border activities) such as the development of Terms of Reference and
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) documents for medical teams in countries.
Objectives of the Panel Discussion:

To raise awareness on the health emergency preparedness and responses;

To review status and challenges of health emergency preparedness and responses in OIC
Member States;

To identify opportunities of collaboration and cooperation in health emergency
preparedness and responses;

To discuss way forward in overcoming challenges
The Panel Discussion will review the current status and global trends along with the strengths
and weaknesses of the OIC and to better understand and improve the health emergency
preparedness and responses. There is an urgent need for OIC Member States to improve their
capacities in preparedness and response areas.
Date :18 November 2015
Time: 14:30 hours
Moderator: Assoc. Prof. Kurtuluş Açıksarı (Turkey)
Rapporteur: Ministry of Health of Turkey
Session Programme and Speakers:
No
Name
1.
Dr.
Muzaffer
Akkoca, Turkey
General
Director
for
Emergency Health Services
of MoH
2.
Organization
Sudan
3.
Mehmet Güllüoğlu, Director Kizilay, Turkey
General of Turkish Red
Crescent
4.
Dr Michelle Gayer, Director
WHO
5.
Dr Sallam Al Bashier
IDB
6.
Prof
John
Clemens, ICDDRB, Bangladesh
Executive Director
4
Room:
Key Questions/Focus Area to be addressed by Panel Members:
1. Turkey (5 minutes):
a.
How Turkey understands the health emergencies and the challenges
ahead,
b.
Importance of rapid response to the health emergencies,
c.
Key achievements and best practice examples in relation to the
management of the health emergencies
2. Sudan (5 minutes):
a. Thematic Area 5 of SHPA,
b. Needs and challenges for the implementation of actions in Thematic Area 5,
c. Way forward in further development of Thematic Area 5.
3. Kızılay (5 minutes):
a. Role of civil society in responding health emergencies,
b. Work done by Kızılay in responding health emergencies,
c. Key achievements of Kızılay in responding emergencies (search and rescue
operations, provision of safe blood and blood products)
4. WHO (5 minutes):
a. Emphasis on preparedness capacity,
b. Global Trends,
c. Global collaboration opportunities
5. IDB
a. Current support of IDB to development of preparedness and response
capacities,
b. Possible solutions to finance funding gaps in SHPA
c. Possible solutions to finance contingency fund
6. ICDDRB (5 minutes):
a. Role of Center of Excellence in responding emergencies,
b. Work done by ICDDRB in responding emergencies,
c. Key achievements of ICDDRB in responding emergencies (search and
rescue operations, provision of oral diarrheal products)
5
OIC/5TH ICHM/2015/DOC.5
6