Increasingly, the need to strengthen global capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to public health threats around the globe is being recognized. CDC, in partnership with the World Health Organization (WHO), has committed to building capacity by assisting member states with strengthening their national capacity for integrated disease surveillance and response as required by International Health Regulations (IHR). CDC and other U.S. agencies have reinforced their pledge through creation of global health security (GHS) demonstration projects. One such project was conducted during March-September 2013, when the Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH) and CDC implemented upgrades in three areas: 1) strengthening the public health laboratory system by increasing the capacity of diagnostic and specimen referral networks, 2) enhancing the existing communications and information systems for outbreak response, and 3) developing a public health emergency operations center (EOC) (Figure 1). The GHS demonstration project outcomes included development of an outbreak response module that allowed reporting of suspected cases of illness caused by priority pathogens via short messaging service (SMS; i.e., text messaging) to the Uganda District Health Information System (DHIS-2) and expansion of the biologic specimen transport and laboratory reporting system supported by the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Other enhancements included strengthening laboratory management, establishing and equipping the EOC, and evaluating these enhancements during an outbreak exercise. In 6 months, the project demonstrated that targeted enhancements resulted in substantial improvements to the ability of Uganda's public health system to detect and respond to health threats.

Over the past decade, Vietnam has successfully responded to global health security (GHS) challenges, including domestic elimination of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and rapid public health responses to human infections with influenza A(H5N1) virus. However, new threats such as Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and influenza A(H7N9) present continued challenges, reinforcing the need to improve the global capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to public health threats. In June 2012, Vietnam, along with many other nations, obtained a 2-year extension for meeting core surveillance and response requirements of the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR). During March-September 2013, CDC and the Vietnamese Ministry of Health (MoH) collaborated on a GHS demonstration project to improve public health emergency detection and response capacity. The project aimed to demonstrate, in a short period, that enhancements to Vietnam's health system in surveillance and early detection of and response to diseases and outbreaks could contribute to meeting the IHR core capacities, consistent with the Asia Pacific Strategy for Emerging Diseases. Work focused on enhancements to three interrelated priority areas and included achievements in 1) establishing an emergency operations center (EOC) at the General Department of Preventive Medicine with training of personnel for public health emergency management; 2) improving the nationwide laboratory system, including enhanced testing capability for several priority pathogens (i.e., those in Vietnam most likely to contribute to public health emergencies of international concern); and 3) creating an emergency response information systems platform, including a demonstration of real-time reporting capability. Lessons learned included awareness that integrated functions within the health system for GHS require careful planning, stakeholder buy-in, and intradepartmental and interdepartmental coordination and communication.

The effects of influenza on a population are attributable to the clinical severity of illness and the number of persons infected, which can vary greatly between seasons or pandemics. To create a systematic framework for assessing the public health effects of an emerging pandemic, we reviewed data from past influenza seasons and pandemics to characterize severity and transmissibility (based on ranges of these measures in the United States) and outlined a formal assessment of the potential effects of a novel virus. The assessment was divided into 2 periods. Because early in a pandemic, measurement of severity and transmissibility is uncertain, we used a broad dichotomous scale in the initial assessment to divide the range of historic values. In the refined assessment, as more data became available, we categorized those values more precisely. By organizing and prioritizing data collection, this approach may inform an evidence-based assessment of pandemic effects and guide decision making.

During the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, the CDC contacted the 50 state, New York City, and District of Columbia health departments and the health department in Puerto Rico through the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), to discuss distributing 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine directly to large pharmacy chains (“pharmacies”) to supplement state vaccination efforts. By the end of December 2009, most states had opened vaccination to all members of the public and a vaccine surplus was projected. All but three states opted to take part in this CDC 2009 H1N1 Vaccine Pharmacy Initiative.* The CDC subsequently invited the largest 15 US pharmacies (by prescription share) to participate, 12 of these pharmacies expressed interest and 10 ultimately participated.1 From December 2009-February 2010, the CDC distributed 5 483 900 doses of 2009 H1N1 vaccine to these pharmacy chains; they in turn, distributed it to more than 10 700 retail stores nationwide. The amount of 2009 H1N1 vaccine that the CDC directly distributed to pharmacy chains comprised approximately 23% of all vaccine distributed during the same time period to the same states and accounted for approximately 4.3% of all 2009 H1N1 vaccine distributed during October 2009-February 2010. Approximately 10% of adults who received 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine reported getting vaccinated at a pharmacy.2 This included vaccinations given with vaccine provided to pharmacies by state health officials and directly by the CDC (Figure).