Introduction
The World Health Organization (2009) regards dengue haemorrhagic as well as dengue fever as critical arthropod borne viral disorder. Annually, there are about half a million individuals who are admitted to hospitals because of the disorder and 50 million new cases of dengue infections. In the Middle East, the disease is less prevalent and it has been reported in countries like Yemen, Saudi Arabia as well as Pakistan.
Financial and human resource allocation is critical to effectively deal with this disorder in the Middle East. This paper will explore human resources and financial allocation to control and alleviate dengue disorder in the Middle East. In particular, this paper will examine the stakeholders involved, the economic impact of the disorder, U.S. global health policies associated with dengue, resources allocated to health care initiatives as well as the progress being made in dealing with dengue in the Middle East.
Stakeholders Involved in Fighting Dengue in the Middle East
Great efforts have been made by various charitable organizations and international organizations to fight dengue in the Middle East. Example of these stakeholders includes the World Health Organization (WHO), the U.S. government through its global health initiative as well as Pan American Health Organization (UNICEF, 2010).
Economic Burden of Dengue in the Middle East
There are notably two types of costs associated with dengue in the Middle East namely direct cost as well as an indirect cost. Lloyd (2003) describes direct costs as those costs that are entrenched in the health care system. They include prevention, treatment and the cost of diagnosis of dengue. Within direct costs, there are three major cost types: prevention, survey and reporting as well as medical care costs. Studies associated with the disorder are critical because they assist charitable organizations, international organizations as well as government agencies to monitor in addition to reporting deaths, outbreaks and cases of the disorder. Indirect costs entail the losses in terms of productivity as a result of the disease.
Lloyd further contends that the estimation of indirect and direct costs associated with dengue in the Middle East is an intricate process because it demands factoring all participants of the various economic sectors such as the society, employers, households as well as the public sector. Besides, there is also scarce literature regarding the exact economic burden of the disorder in terms of dollars in the Middle East. However, in Thailand, the economic costs associated with dengue are estimated to be US$ 109.16 billion.
U.S. Global Initiative and Funds allocated to fight dengue
Apart from being one the countries that fund the Global Fund, the United States government is arguably the greatest donor globally concerning global health. In 2010, President Barrack Obama proposed 63 billion U.S. dollars for six years as part of the U.S. global initiative to fight diseases such as dengue, malaria, tuberculosis as well as AIDS (Reporter’s Guide to U.S. Global Health Policy 2010). After consulting widely with the U.S. Congress, international and multinational institutions, the private sector, various governments, donors’ agencies, civil societies as well as partner countries, President Obama’s administration released a comprehensive document on how to adopt the global health initiative.
The GHI places more focus on promoting innovation and research, enhancing monitoring and measurement of progress, reinforcing health systems, promoting country ownership, reinforcing multinational institutions, integration and coordinating of programs as well as putting more emphasis on girls and women. Through this initiative, some of the countries in the Middle East will receive extra funds to speed implementation in addition to technical assistance that aims at minimizing the prevalence of dengue.
As opined by Lloyd (2003), the PAHO (Pan American Health Organization), initiated a plan that placed more focus on the role of social communication as well as community participation in 1997, as a critical component of national schemes. This plan called for 10% of the dengue management budget to support social communication as well as community participation.
Progress Being Made in Dealing with Dengue
In countries like Pakistan, there has been notable progress in her war against dengue. As revealed by Cunningham, Cunningham and Woodworth (2003), Pakistan has made a tremendous gain in its efforts to fight the disorder. U.S. global health initiatives, as well as the World Health Organization, have channelled a lot of money into this country and as a result, the prevalence of this disorder in Pakistan has considerably decreased. Mosquito nets, as well as drugs, have been supplied to Pakistan’s population and they have played a critical role in controlling the disease.
Conclusion
Conclusively, it is evident in the paper that there are about half a million individuals who are admitted to hospitals because of dengue and 50 million new cases of dengue infections. In the Middle East, the disease is less prevalent and cases of the disorder have been reported in countries like Yemen, Saudi Arabia as well as Pakistan. To effectively deal with this disorder, financial and human resource allocation is critical. This paper revealed that there are two types of costs associated with dengue in the Middle East namely direct costs as well as indirect costs. Direct costs are those that are entrenched in the health care system.
They include prevention, treatment and the cost of diagnosis of dengue. Within direct costs, other three major cost types exist as prevention costs, survey and reporting as well as costs related to medical care. Studies associated with the disorder are critical because they assist charitable organizations, international organizations as well as government agencies to monitor in addition to report deaths, outbreaks and cases of the disorder. Indirect cost entails the losses in terms of productivity as a result of the disease.
References
Cunningham, W. P., Cunningham, M. A., & Woodworth, B. (2003). Environmental Science: A Global Concern. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lloyd, L. S. (2003). Best Practices for Dengue Prevention and Control in the Americas. Web.
Reporter’s Guide to U.S. Global Health Policy (2010). The Basis of Global Health. Web.
UNICEF (2010). UNICEF Annual Report 2009. New York: UNICEF.
World Health Organization (2009). Dengue: Guideline for Diagnosis, Treatment, Prevention and Control. Geneva: World Health Organization.