An Analysis of International Health Regulations Emergency Committees and Public Health Emergency of International Concern Designations

BMJ Global Health, 2020;5:e002502, DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002502

11 Pages Posted: 2 Jul 2020 Last revised: 29 Oct 2020

See all articles by Lucia Mullen

Lucia Mullen

Johns Hopkins University

Christina Potter

Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health

Lawrence O. Gostin

Georgetown University - Law Center - O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law

Anita Cicero

Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health

Jennifer Nuzzo

Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health

Date Written: June 15, 2020

Abstract

Nine public health events have been assessed for the potential declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). According to the World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations (IHR), a PHEIC is defined as an extraordinary event that constitutes a public health risk to other states through international spread and requires a coordinated international response. The WHO Director-General convenes Emergency Committees (ECs) to provide their advice on whether an event constitutes a PHEIC. The EC rationales have been continuously criticised for being non-transparent and contradictory to the IHR. This first comprehensive analysis of EC rationale provides recommendations to increase clarity of EC decisions which will strengthen the IHR and WHO’s legitimacy in future outbreaks.

A total of 66 EC statements were reviewed from the nine public health outbreaks of influenza A, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, polio, Ebola virus disease, Zika, yellow fever and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Statements were analysed to determine which of the three IHR criteria were noted as contributing towards the EC’s justification on whether to recommend to the WHO Director-General that a PHEIC be declared and what language was used to explain their decision.

Interpretation of the criteria were often vague and applied inconsistently. ECs often failed to describe and justify which criteria had been satisfied. Guidelines must be developed for the standardised interpretation of IHR core criteria. The ECs must clearly identify and justify which criteria have contributed to their rationale for or against PHEIC declaration. Striving for more consistency and transparency in EC justifications would benefit future deliberations and provide more understanding and support for the process.

Keywords: Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), Emergency Committee, International Health Regulations (IHR), Global Health

Suggested Citation

Mullen, Lucia and Potter, Christina and Gostin, Lawrence O. and Cicero, Anita and Nuzzo, Jennifer, An Analysis of International Health Regulations Emergency Committees and Public Health Emergency of International Concern Designations (June 15, 2020). BMJ Global Health, 2020;5:e002502, DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002502 , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3640766 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3640766

Lucia Mullen (Contact Author)

Johns Hopkins University ( email )

Baltimore, MD 20036-1984
United States

Christina Potter

Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health ( email )

615 North Wolfe Street
Baltimore, MD 21205
United States

Lawrence O. Gostin

Georgetown University - Law Center - O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law ( email )

600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
United States
202-662-9038 (Phone)
202-662-9055 (Fax)

Anita Cicero

Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health ( email )

615 North Wolfe Street
Baltimore, MD 21205
United States

Jennifer Nuzzo

Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health ( email )

615 North Wolfe Street
Baltimore, MD 21205
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
60
Abstract Views
577
Rank
648,299
PlumX Metrics