INTERPRETING HEALTH METRICS FROM A PUBLIC HEALTH PERSPECTIVE; CASE OF USA AND UGANDA

 All countries have a Public Health Provision Model that combines maximizing individual positive outcomes as well as minimizing adverse collective outcomes. The countries promote population-based activities, monitor health status, investigate health problems and hazards, inform and educate people about health issues, mobilize communities, develop policies and plans, enforce laws and regulations for the wellness of their citizens.
To promote public health practice, medical health practice and long term care practice that in turn ensure quality life, these countries invest money of different amounts. They commit resources which cause health outcomes. However, the social-ecological factors in these countries make it a unique framework within which to provide public health and medical health services. Biologic, environment, behavioral, social, cultural and health services available in a given country in turn affect the well-being of the citizens.  These in turn affect the impact of the strategies or interventions. 
The US has a population total of 320,051,000. Its total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP for the year 2013 was $ 17.1, a total expenditure on health per capita for 2013 at $ 9,146 and life expectancy of males at 76 and females at 81 (www.who.int/countries/en/).  It has committed over 15 million workers in the Public Health workforce and $ 3.0 trillion in resources. The public health needs presently facing the US include: slowing population goeth rate, and older population, increasing diversity of population, changes in the family structure, a persistent lack of access to needed health services for many Americans and relative prevalence of particular diseases (Turnock, B. J. 2016).
On the other hand, Uganda has a population total of about 37, 579,00, its total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP for the year 2013 was $ 9.8 a total expenditure on health per capita for 2013 at $ 146 and life expectancy of males at 57 and females at 61 (www.who.int/countries/en/). faced with lukewarm commitment in funding the health sector. The funds keep vacillating below or above $294,117, 000 as in the case of 2011. This amount is far below what the international ceiling ( e.g., Abuja Declaration) calls for.  Uganda still battles parasite infestation e.g., malaria-causing mosquitoes.  Plans to commit to eradicate malaria are half hearted pronouncements made at electoral campaigns most of the time. “The Government also committed itself towards developing and implementing a comprehensive strategy to eradicate malaria and strengthen its prevention, diagnosis and treatment. It also committed itself to reduce morbidity and mortality from the major causes of ill health and premature death,” (www.newvision.co.ug).
 
In order for public health to be a collective effort that promotes quality health outcomes, countries need to back public health initiatives with a funding commitment and not just lip service. Public Health Provision can be effective if it combines maximizing individual positive outcomes as well as minimizing adverse collective outcomes.
REFERENCES:
Turnock, B. J. (2016). Essentials of public health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett.  
Advertisements