Evidence-Based Practice for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response

Research output: Book/ReportOther reportpeer-review

Electronic versions

DOI

  • Bruce Calonge
  • David M. Abramson
  • Julie Casani
  • David Eisenman
  • Francisco Garcia
  • Paul Halverson
  • Sean Hennessy
  • Edbert Hsu
  • Nathaniel Hupert
  • Rebecca A. Maynard
  • Suzet McKinney
  • Jane Noyes
  • Douglas K. Owens
  • Sandra Quinn
  • Paul Shekelle
  • Andy Stergachis
  • Mitch Stripling
  • Steven M. Teutsch
  • Tener Goodwin Veenema
  • Matthew Wynia
  • Mahshid Abir
When communities face complex public health emergencies, state local, tribal, and territorial public health agencies must make difficult decisions regarding how to effectively respond. The public health emergency preparedness and response (PHEPR) system, with its multifaceted mission to prevent, protect against, quickly respond to, and recover from public health emergencies, is inherently complex and encompasses policies, organizations, and programs. Since the events of September 11, 2001, the United States has invested billions of dollars and immeasurable amounts of human capital to develop and enhance public health emergency preparedness and infrastructure to respond to a wide range of public health threats, including infectious diseases, natural disasters, and chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear events. Despite the investments in research and the growing body of empirical literature on a range of preparedness and response capabilities and functions, there has been no national-level, comprehensive review and grading of evidence for public health emergency preparedness and response practices comparable to those utilized in medicine and other public health fields.

Evidence-Based Practice for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response reviews the state of the evidence on PHEPR practices and the improvements necessary to move the field forward and to strengthen the PHEPR system. This publication evaluates PHEPR evidence to understand the balance of benefits and harms of PHEPR practices, with a focus on four main areas of PHEPR: engagement with and training of community-based partners to improve the outcomes of at-risk populations after public health emergencies; activation of a public health emergency operations center; communication of public health alerts and guidance to technical audiences during a public health emergency; and implementation of quarantine to reduce the spread of contagious illness.

Keywords

  • Public health emergency events, public health emergency response, evidence synthesis, recommendations for reform
Original languageEnglish
Place of PublicationWashington DC
PublisherNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Commissioning bodyCenter for Disease Control and Prevention
Number of pages650
ISBN (electronic)9780309670418
ISBN (print)9780309670388
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020
View graph of relations