Explore the vast range of titles available.

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global crisis. Many countries have implemented restrictions on population movement to slow the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and prevent health systems from becoming overwhelmed; some have instituted full or partial lockdowns. However, lockdowns and other extreme restrictions cannot be sustained for the long term in the hope that there will be an effective vaccine or treatment for COVID-19. Governments worldwide now face the common challenge of easing lockdowns and restrictions while balancing various health, social, and economic concerns. To facilitate cross-country learning, this Health Policy paper uses an adapted framework to examine the approaches taken by nine high-income countries and regions that have started to ease COVID-19 restrictions: five in the Asia Pacific region (ie, Hong Kong [Special Administrative Region], Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea) and four in Europe (ie, Germany, Norway, Spain, and the UK). This comparative analysis presents important lessons to be learnt from the experiences of these countries and regions. Although the future of the virus is unknown at present, countries should continue to share their experiences, shield populations who are at risk, and suppress transmission to save lives.

Singapore, one of the first countries affected by COVID-19, adopted a national strategy for the pandemic which emphasised preparedness through a whole-of-nation approach. The pandemic was well contained initially until early April 2020, when there was a surge in cases, attributed to Singapore residents returning from hotspots overseas, and more significantly, rapid transmission locally within migrant worker dormitories. In this paper, we present the response of Singapore to the COVID-19 pandemic based on core dimensions of health system resilience during outbreaks. We also discussed on the surge in cases in April 2020, highlighting efforts to mitigate it. There was: (1) clear leadership and governance which adopted flexible plans appropriate to the situation; (2) timely, accurate and transparent communication from the government; (3) public health measures to reduce imported cases, and detect as well as isolate cases early; (4) maintenance of health service delivery; (5) access to crisis financing; and (6) legal foundation to complement policy measures. Areas for improvement include understanding reasons for poor uptake of government initiatives, such as the mobile application for contact tracing and adopting a more inclusive response that protects all individuals, including at-risk populations. The experience in Singapore and lessons learnt will contribute to pandemic preparedness and mitigation in the future.

Improving the career progression of women and ethnic minorities in public health universities has been a longstanding challenge, which we believe might be addressed by including staff diversity data in university rankings. We present findings from a mixed methods investigation of gender-related and ethnicity-related differences in career progression at the 15 highest ranked social sciences and public health universities in the world, including an analysis of the intersection between sex and ethnicity. Our study revealed that clear gender and ethnic disparities remain at the most senior academic positions, despite numerous diversity policies and action plans reported. In all universities, representation of women declined between middle and senior academic levels, despite women outnumbering men at the junior level. Ethnic-minority women might have a magnified disadvantage because ethnic-minority academics constitute a small proportion of junior-level positions and the proportion of ethnic-minority women declines along the seniority pathway.

Social prescribing is a mechanism for connecting patients with non-medical forms of support within the community and has been shown to improve loneliness. Yet uptake from young people (YP) has been lower than for adults. That is thought to be the case because young people are less likely to engage with primary care for wellbeing support, where social prescribing is based. The INACT study will pilot a social prescribing pathway via schools to support young people who are lonely, testing its feasibility and acceptability of delivering, and evaluating its impact on loneliness through a randomised controlled trial. This pilot study utilises a two-group (intervention vs. active control) parallel randomised design, with YP as the unit of randomisation. Approximately 78 pupils reporting loneliness will be recruited across 12 mainstream (6 primary and 6 secondary) schools in England. The co-produced social prescribing intervention includes 6-12 sessions over an 8-week period with a Link Worker who will work with individuals, on a one-to-one basis, to understand 'what matters to them' and connect them with local sources of support. Pupils in the control group will receive signposting to sources of support from school staff. Data will be collected at baseline, 3- and 6-month follow-up. Acceptability and feasibility will be assessed via participant recruitment and retention, and via qualitative interviews. Interviews will also explore barriers and facilitators to engagement and implementation and mechanisms of change. Primary and secondary outcomes will be completed to assess response and completeness, including measures of loneliness, mental health and wellbeing. The INACT study will provide preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of both the research design and social prescribing intervention. Results will inform a planned future randomised trial. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06656663.

Background As the incidence and prevalence rates of end stage renal disease (ESRD) rise globally, a disproportionate increase has been observed in the elderly population. Singapore has the fifth highest incidence of treated ESRD worldwide, with the upward trend of ESRD being most apparent among those aged 70 years and older. Although it is well-documented that ESRD patients suffer an impaired quality of life compared to the general population, there is limited research focusing on the unique experiences and needs of elderly ESRD patients in Asian populations. To address the knowledge gap, this study seeks to explore the impact of ESRD and dialysis on the quality of life of elderly (≥70 years old) ESRD patients in Singapore and examine the coping strategies utilised by these patients. Methods This qualitative study involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 7 peritoneal dialysis patients, 5 haemodialysis patients, 4 patients on non-dialysis supportive care and 7 caregivers in Singapore. Interviews were conducted in English, Chinese, and Malay and fully transcribed. QSR NVivo 11 software was used for analysis. Results Participants reported that ESRD and dialysis had an impact on three highly interconnected areas of their quality of life: (a) biological/physical (general symptoms, neuromuscular problems, skin problems and poor sleep quality); (b) psychological (depressive symptoms, anxiety and fears, stress and negative self-perceptions); and (c) social (increased dependence on family and loss of social life). There were four key strategies that participants used to cope with these biopsychosocial challenges: (a) family support (financial, practical and emotional support); (b) religious/spiritual support (experiencing gratitude/contentment, the power of prayer and belonging to a faith community); (c) avoidance (cognitive avoidance and distraction techniques); and (d) acceptance (positive thinking and problem solving). Conclusions This study has provided insights into the biopsychosocial impact of ESRD and dialysis, as well as cultural and religious factors that shape the experiences and coping mechanisms of elderly ESRD patients and caregivers in Singapore, which can be used to further the development and implementation of more holistic and person-centred services to help each patient achieve a better quality of life.

Background The choices that policymakers make are shaped by how their problems are framed. At last, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have risen high on the global policy agenda, but there are many disputed issues. First, what are they? Their name refers not to what they are but what they are not. Second, where do their boundaries lie? What diseases are included? Third, should we view their causes as mainly biomedical, behavioural, or social, or a combination? Our failure to resolve these issues has been invoked as a reason for our limited progress in developing and implementing effective remedies. In this scoping review, we ask “What is known from the existing literature about how NCDs are framed in the global policy discourses?” We answer it by reviewing the frames employed in policy and academic discourses. Methods We searched nine electronic databases for articles published since inception to 31 May 2019. We also reviewed websites of eight international organisations to identify global NCDs policies. We extracted data and synthesised findings to identify key thematic frames. Results We included 36 articles and nine policy documents on global NCDs policies. We identified five discursive domains that have been used and where there are differing perspectives. These are: “Expanding the NCDs frame to include mental health and air pollution”; “NCDs and their determinants”; “A rights-based approach to NCDs”; “Approaches to achieving policy coherence in NCDs globally”; and “NCDs as part of Sustainable Socio-economic Development”. We further identified 12 frames within the five discursive domains. Conclusions This scoping review identifies issues that remain unresolved and points to a need for alignment of perspectives among global health policy actors, as well as synergies with those working on mental health, maternal health, and child health. The current COVID-19 pandemic warrants greater consideration of its impact on global NCDs policies. Future global strategies for NCDs need to consider explicitly how NCDs are framed in a changing global health discourse and ensure adequate alignment with implementation and global health issues. There is a need for global strategies to recognise the pertinent role of actors in shaping policy discourses.

Background End‐stage renal disease (ESRD) is increasing both globally and in Asia. Singapore has the fifth highest incidence of ESRD worldwide, a trend that is predicted to rise. Older patients with ESRD are faced with a choice of haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis or conservative management, all of which have their risks and benefits. Objective This study seeks to explore perspectives on decision making amongst older (≥70) Singaporean ESRD patients and their caregivers to undergo (or not to undergo) dialysis. Design Qualitative study design using semi‐structured interviews. Setting and participants Twenty‐three participants were recruited from the largest tertiary hospital in Singapore: seven peritoneal dialysis patients, five haemodialysis patients, four patients on conservative management and seven caregivers. Results While some patients believed that they had made an independent treatment decision, others reported feeling like they had no choice in the matter or that they were strongly persuaded by their doctors and/or family members to undergo dialysis. Patients reported decision‐making factors including loss of autonomy in daily life, financial burden (on themselves or on their families), caregiving burden, alternative medicine, symptoms and disease progression. Caregivers also reported concerns about financial and caregiving burden. Discussion and conclusion This study has identified several factors that should be considered in the design and implementation of decision aids to help older ESRD patients in Singapore make informed treatment decisions, including patients' and caregivers' decision‐making factors as well as the relational dynamics between patients, caregivers and doctors.

Background In Singapore, the burden of hypertension disproportionately falls on the elderly population of low socio-economic status. Despite availability of effective treatment, studies have shown high prevalence of sub-optimal blood pressure control in this group. Poor hypertension management can be attributed to a number of personal factors including awareness, management skills and overall adherence to treatment. However, these factors are also closely linked to a broader range of community and policy factors. This paper explores the perceived social and physical environments of low socio-economic status and elderly patients with hypertension; and how the interplay of factors within these environments influences their ability to mobilise resources for hypertension management. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted in English, Chinese, Chinese dialects and Malay with 20 hypertensive patients of various ethnic backgrounds. Purposive sampling was adopted for recruitment of participants from a previous community health screening campaign. Interviews were translated into English and transcribed verbatim. We deductively analysed leveraging on the Social Model of Health to identify key themes, while inductive analysis was used simultaneously to allow sub-themes to emerge. Results and discussion Our finding shows that financing is an overarching topic embedded in most themes. Despite the availability of multiple safety nets, some patients were left out and lacked capital to navigate systems effectively, which resulted in delayed treatment or debt. The built environment played a significant role in enabling patients to access care easily and lead a more active lifestyle. A closer look is needed to enhance the capacity of patients with mobility challenges to enjoy equitable access. Furthermore, the establishment of community based elderly centres has enabled patients to engage in meaningful and healthy social activities. In contrast, participants’ descriptions showed that their communication with healthcare professionals remained brief, and that personalised and meaningful interactions that are context and culturally specific are essential to advocate for patients’ overall treatment adherence and lifestyle modification. Conclusion Elderly patients with hypertension from lower socio-economic background have various unmet needs in managing their hypertension and other comorbidities. These needs are closely related to broader societal factors such as socio-demographic characteristics, support systems, urban planning and public policies, and health systems factors. Policy decisions to address these needs require an integrated multi-sectoral approach grounded in the principles of health equity.

Eva Turk and colleagues believe that there is much to learn from the experiences of low and middle income countries in co-producing knowledge and working with communities to find feasible and acceptable solutions to healthcare concerns

Social prescribing is a mechanism for connecting patients with non-medical forms of support within the community and has been shown to improve loneliness. Yet uptake from young people (YP) has been lower than for adults. That is thought to be the case because young people are less likely to engage with primary care for wellbeing support, where social prescribing is based. The INACT study will pilot a social prescribing pathway via schools to support young people who are lonely, testing its feasibility and acceptability of delivering, and evaluating its impact on loneliness through a randomised controlled trial. This pilot study utilises a two-group (intervention vs. active control) parallel randomised design, with YP as the unit of randomisation. Approximately 78 pupils reporting loneliness will be recruited across 12 mainstream (6 primary and 6 secondary) schools in England. The co-produced social prescribing intervention includes 6-12 sessions over an 8-week period with a Link Worker who will work with individuals, on a one-to-one basis, to understand 'what matters to them' and connect them with local sources of support. Pupils in the control group will receive signposting to sources of support from school staff. Data will be collected at baseline, 3- and 6-month follow-up. Acceptability and feasibility will be assessed via participant recruitment and retention, and via qualitative interviews. Interviews will also explore barriers and facilitators to engagement and implementation and mechanisms of change. Primary and secondary outcomes will be completed to assess response and completeness, including measures of loneliness, mental health and wellbeing. The INACT study will provide preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of both the research design and social prescribing intervention. Results will inform a planned future randomised trial.