Important: The POPLINE website will retire on September 1, 2019. Click here to read about the transition.

Your search found 3 Results

  1. 1
    267341

    Primary health care bibliography and resource directory.

    Montague J; Montague S; Cebula D; Favin M

    Geneva, Switzerland, World Federation of Public Health Associations [WFPHA], 1984 Aug. vii, 78 p. (Information for Action)

    This bibliograph contains 4 parts. Part 1 is anannotated bibiography covering the following topics: an overview of health care in developing countries; planning and management of primary health care (PHC): manpower training and utilization; community participation and health education; delivery of health services, including nutrition, maternal and child health, family planning, medical and dental care; disease control, water and sanitation, and pharmaceutical; and auxiliary services, Part 2 is a reference directory covering periodicals directories, handbooks and catalogs, in PHC, as well as computerized information services, educational aids and training programs, (including audiovisual and other teaching aids), and procurement of supplies and pharmaceuticals. Also given are lists of international and private donor agencies, including development cooperation agencies, and directories of foundations and proposal writing. Parts 3 and 4 are the August 1984 updates of the original May 1982 edition of the bibliography.
    Add to my documents.
  2. 2
    025018

    Executive Board monitors progress towards health for all.

    Who Chronicle. 1984; 38(2):47-59.

    The 73rd session of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Executive Board met in January 1984 to review progress in implementing strategies for health for all by the year 2000, based on information emanating from the countries themselves. This monitoring function was assigned to the Board by the World Health Assembly in 1981 and calls for the Board to evaluate progress towards health for all at regular intervals and to report back to the Health Assembly. The 1st country reports together with comments of the regional committees and relevant information provided by theSecretariat were examined in November 1983 by the Board's Program Committee. Emphasis at this stage was placed on reviewing the relevance of national health policies to the attainment of health for all and the progress being made in implementing national strategies. Actual evaluation of the strategies will begin in 1985. As many of the country reports submitted were not as complete or as accurate as they could have been, the overall progress report submitted were not as complete or as accurate as they could have been, the overall progress report suffered from a lack of detailed and precise informattion on many important aspects that were crucial to national health for all strategies. Dr. Brandt, presenting the Program Committee's views, told the board that the report did indicate that a high level of political sensitization had occurred and that the political will to attain the goal of health for all existed in a large majorithy of the countries that had reported. The report indicated that to a large extent the Secretariat had met its responsibilities. It was the Member States that had to shoulder the responsibility and reaffirm their commitment by action. The Program Committee's progress report points to the existence of specific technical needs, particularly in national capability to carry out health policies. Among the areas requiring strengthening are information analysis and management, financial analysis, assessment of status of public information, competence in planning and management, effective involvement of relevant sectors in health, and measurement of intersectoral action for health. The Board urged Member States to give highest priority to the continuing monitoring and evaluation of their health for all strategies and to assume full responsibility for this process. In regard to the action program on essential drugs and vaccines, priority in the last 2 years has gone to training and manpower development, the dissemination of experience and information, cooperation in the procurement and production of essential drugs, technical cooperation among developing countries, and contracts with nongovernmental organizations and the pharmaceutical industry. During the far ranging discussion that ensued in the Executive Board, members addressed themselves in considerable detail to numerous aspects of the action program. The Board approved a new and carefully phased procedure for the review of substances to be recommended for international drug control.
    Add to my documents.
  3. 3
    267012

    Application of WHO Essential Drugs in practice.

    Gotnik MH; Faber DB

    Tropical Doctor. 1984 Jan; 14(1):8.

    Enormous problems in developing countries concerning drug supply, such as inadequate control of money spent on drugs, insufficient government supervision of the importation and distribution of drugs, dumping, and so on, prompted the World Health Organization to set up an expert committee to compile a list of drugs which would provide adequate health care. This Essential Drug list is intended to extend the accessibility of the most necessary drugs to those populations whose basic health needs could not be met by the existing supply system. In cooperation with Medicus Mundi Nederland the use of this basic list is investigated in a population of medical doctors in Africa, sent out by Medicus Mundi. Investigated were: actual use of the essential drug; use of other drugs in the same pharmacotherapeutical group; priority; availability; and suppliers. In addition, insight into a number of other factors, such as the number of patients, beds, stocklists, local production, and supply of information, was obtained. The total number of patients in the combined areas was about 3,500,000. It was found that 3% of WHO's suggested drugs were not used at all, 22 essential drugs were used by only 5% of the doctors, and 41 essential drugs were used by more than 95% of the doctors. In the 1979 Revised List 25 drugs had been added and 10 deleted, compared with the 1st list, although it should be remembered that the differences were not always great. Several essential drugs mentioned for the 1st time in the Revised List are little used. Some complementary drugs scored better than the essential drugs from the same group. A number of drugs not mentioned in the List of Essential Drugs have a high priority. The results of the inquiry will be useful to evaluate the list further.
    Add to my documents.