It’s time for the European Union to bolster its health competence, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said today. “It is crystal clear: We need to build a strong European health union,” von der Leyen said. “It is time to do that.”

One of her key proposals is creating a European version of the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to help the EU better respond during emergencies relating to cross-border threats.The EU also needs strategic stockpiling and should fix its supply chain issues, especially for pharmaceutical goods, she said.Furthermore, she noted, there’s a need to “reinforce” existing European health agencies such as the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). More broadly, it’s “clearer than ever that we must discuss the question of health competencies” at the Conference on the Future of Europe, she said, drawing applause from parliamentarians. The Commission president also mentioned the EU4Health program, which was cut from nearly €10 billion to nearly €2 billion during negotiations with the Council over the bloc’s long-term budget. Von der Leyen said it’s time to make the program “future proof,” and added she’s “grateful” that the European Parliament will “fight for more” money. Last, von der Leyen said, she will convene a global health summit in Italy next year, when Italy will head the G20 Presidency.

Specifically on the EU action to fight the pandemic, President Ursula von der Leyen patted Europe on the back today for not adopting a “Europe first” policy when it comes to its coronavirus response. Without naming names, von der Leyen noted that other countries chose to “retreat into isolation” while others opted to “actively destabilize the system.” By contrast, “Europe chose to reach out,” she said, as she delivered her first speech on the state of the EU to MEPs. As an example, she cited the EU’s decision to send planes with tons of medical equipment to countries in need, including Sudan, Venezuela and Somalia. Most notably, however, von der Leyen pointed to the Commission’s work in establishing the Coronavirus Global Response. After two online events, it has raised roughly €16 billion toward ensuring global access to affordable vaccines, therapeutics and tests. “At the beginning of the pandemic, there was no funding, no global framework for a COVID-19 vaccine,” she said. “There was just the rush to be the first one to get one.” She pointed to how the Commission pledged €400 million toward the COVAX facility, an effort by the World Health Organization and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, to get wealthier countries to help finance vaccines for low- and middle-income countries. Furthermore, Von der Leyen said, Europe should take the lead in reforming the WHO.

She made those comments amid ongoing criticism that the Commission’s vaccine strategy — which it unveiled in June to allow Brussels to advance purchase coronavirus vaccines — is de facto a “Europe First” policy. The Commission’s involvement with COVAX is also unclear, as it has yet to clarify whether it will procure vaccines through the facility or just give money.

Those are the key takeaway for healthcare from today's speech in front of the European parliament. If you wish to read more on the full speech: click here

The purpose of the discussion was to bring together healthcare authorities, patients, healthcare providers and workers as well as EU policymakers to debate the current landscape surrounding patient safety in Europe and showcase the patient safety success stories from across Europe's regions and local governments.

Patient safety remains a challenge for European healthcare systems. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), medication errors and healthcare-related adverse events occur in 8% to 12% of the hospitalizations in Europe. Nearly half of the harm is believed to be preventable. Lapses in safety not only result in significant patient suffering but represent a considerable financial burden as well. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that direct costs of unnecessary harm to patients can amount to as much as 5% of total health expenditure.

The Keynote contributors included representatives from:

• ECDC - European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
• The European Parliament
• UEHP - European Union of Private Hospitals
• IAPO - International Alliance of Patients' Organizations
• University of Ferrara (Italy) 

Our President, Dr Garassus, who spoke on behalf of UEHP, brought the perspective of the private hospitals sector to the discussion, highlighting that we are not only speaking about patient safety but also about healthcare workforce safety! After reviewing some of definitions of safety and quality of care by WHO, College of Europe, etc. our President presented two concrete exemples of clinical risk management in two private hospitals group in germany, Asklepios and Sana Kliniken. Finally , Dr Garassus presented our concept of “Smart Hospitals” and stressed the need for inclusive reforms and sustainable investments to enhance efficient solutions, reduce waiting lists, limit waste and ensure permanent information available for medical staff and managers.

The aim is to offer you a clear and common vision of upcoming opportunities related to:

• European structural and investment funds managed at national/regional levels
• Funds directly managed by the European Commission
• EU Recovery plan - Next Generation EU

Not only the webinar will be the opportunity to learn more about EU funding programs, but also to ask questions to the experts for each of the above-mentioned themes. 

On the initiative of our President, we believe the webinar will be useful to you and especially to your own members willing to know more about EU funding and how to apply to European call for proposals. Please feel free to forward this invitation to your members and network.  

The webinar is free of charge, but the prior registration is mandatory. Please register at the following address: here

As you may recall, this event, that UEHP is organizing in cooperation with the European Alliance for Access to Safe Medicines (EAASM), was initially scheduled in March at the European Parliament. Unfortunately, we had to postpone it due to the COVID19 pandemic and since the situation is still difficult (especially in Brussels), we finally decided with the organizers to turn it to an online event. 

You are all encouraged to take part in the event and to share this invitation with your own members and colleagues who could be interested.

Please find here the draft agenda and link to register to the webinar. More information can be found at the EAASM website.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us the importance of cooperation between all sectors and actors to ensure our healthcare systems can function to their best ability in saving human lives.

In 2018, 33 organisations came together under the umbrella of the EU Health Coalition. They jointly developed 20 recommendations for a healthier Europe to promote a shared vision of health in Europe. A number of these have since been implemented including, most notably, giving a much larger role to health at EU level. Much still remains to be done!

This year, it is time for action. The continued and concrete implementation of the 2018 recommendations requires a broad support base as well as multi-stakeholder actions. For the second edition of the EU Health Summit, participants together with the EU Health Coalition partners, will develop implementing actions to continue to translate the 2018 recommendations into concrete policy change and improve Europeans’ health and health systems’ sustainability. Particular attention will be paid to the lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic and how to translate these into a political vision capable of maximising collaboration and ensuring a healthy and equitable future for everyone in Europe.

You can find more information about the programme here. Join us on the 26th of October at 13:30. Together, we are shaping the future of Health in Europe.

For more information please visit:
Register now

The EU Health Coalition was created following the first-ever EU Health Summit, in November 2018. The Coalition promotes a shared vision of health in Europe, based on jointly developed recommendations. The purpose is to ensure that health remains high on the political agenda and to champion the changes required to address the unprecedented challenges that an ageing population and an increasing prevalence of chronic diseases pose to healthcare systems and citizens.

The EU Health Coalition is composed of patient organisations, EU research-oriented medical societies, industry organisations, healthcare providers, regional and local health authorities and other relevant stakeholders, who all share a common vision. To find out more about the work of the EU Health Coalition, please visit our website here.

The following two electronic cross-border health services are currently progressively introduced in all EU countries:

• ePrescription (and eDispensation) allows EU citizens to obtain their medication in a pharmacy located in another EU country, thanks to the online transfer of their electronic prescription from their country of residence where they are affiliated, to their country of travel.
• Patient Summary provides information on important health related aspects such as allergies, current medication, previous illness, surgeries, etc. It is part of  a larger collection of health data called electronic Health Record. The digital Patient Summary is meant to provide doctors with essential information in their own language concerning the patient, when the patient comes from another EU country and there may be a linguistic barrier. On a longer term, not only the basic medical information of the Patient Summary, but the full Health Record should become available across the EU. The exchange of ePrescriptions and Patient Summaries is open to all the Member States.

Both ePrescriptions and Patient Summaries can be exchanged between EU countries thanks to the new eHealth Digital Service Infrastructure (eHDSI).

By 2021, both services will gradually be implemented in 22 EU countries: Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

For more information please visit:
https://ec.europa.eu/health/ehealth/electronic_crossborder_healthservices_en

The vaccine war has been declared. The announcement effect has politicians from all over the world and from all sides taking on the challenge and racing to develop a vaccine for the COVID-19 coronavirus.
As doctors, it is our conviction that in the face of this RNA virus against which we have no proven curative therapeutic means, the vaccine appears to be the needed solution to limit the pandemic. At this stage, we are fully aware of the commitment of the scientific research laboratories but also of the entire Big Phama to achieve this technological feat in the shortest possible time for the benefit of the world population.
But now, this competitive scenario poses a problem. The first international war for influence on vaccine strategies dates back to "Ottocento" with Pasteur. The significance of this new virus challenges us in technical and ethical terms while facing a potential conflict. Vladimir Putin has announced the success of the Russian research, the large industrial groups of the European or North American pharmaceutical sector have signed preferential allocation contracts with some national governments.
What are the expected benefits of such negotiations? Obviously, the short-term interest is the possibility for politicians to be able to shelter the people of their country from the dangers of viral infection. To limit lethal complications and medical problems, but also to it make possible to return once again to a "normal" life where students can go to school, workers return to their production force, and the elderly be kept safe from harm. The latter having already paid the heaviest price.
But medical nationalism, which de facto amounts to excluding our neighbours, near and far, from this therapeutic benefit, is very difficult to defend. Should we conceive that the competitive advantage of putting a production force back into working order with a lead over potential competitors, should be neglected in economic terms? No. And from a strategical standpoint to benefit from a dominant position? Neither. Ethically, on the other hand, this is not even conceivable.
Researchers are currently exploring different but often innovative avenues. We believe, without mastering the timeframe, in the effectiveness of these research commitments performed under pressure. This crisis will create, like any major event, a historic break in our globalized societies. Economic regulation will not weaken, its application methods will nevertheless evolve. Thus, a priority or a preference towards a single State would be untenable, both in terms of access time and authorization. Global public health will undoubtedly face a political and moral question. Who should benefit from the benefits of science, the financers or humanity as a whole? We know the logic involved in return on invested capital (ROIC) on the part of economic actors in health, as well as the strategic support for investment by engaged governments struggling for influence. Some healthcare companies involved in the creation of a new vaccine refer to the principle of an "ethical profit margin", which is a new concept yet to be defined. The possible strategic advantages obtained will be greatly argued but the principle of equal access must be privileged by following the recommendations of international organizations, in the first line of which is WHO.
The medical challenges will have to be anticipated because the potential problems are numerous: a possible iatrogenic reaction, even if in the best case it is less than 0.001% , it could be problematic if the vaccination covers 7.5 billion people. We also know that the authorization and safety procedures will have to constrain the usual delays. And what about legal protection for any innovation placed on the market, if similar ones are offered? Finally, the industrial process, beyond the discovery itself and we are talking about the production chain, remains a major organizational challenge to be resolved.
We have no doubt that medical ethics shall be part of the debate and we trust that it will triumph. Nationalism has no place in health, nor do the usual purely commercial reasonings. The political power struggle for the vaccine race, like the race for the moon in other times, is irrelevant. The virus is ubiquitous, its treatment must be quickly accessible to all. The great democracies must be able to demonstrate that they are the real vector of medical scientific progress, and that the collective benefit for the world population is the only legitimate target made possible by our combined financial means. In this regard, Europe must certainly get involved as a major player in social progress because the Second World Vaccine War or "World Vax War" must not take place.

Dr Paul GARASSUS, President of UEHP (European Union of Private Hospitals) and Vice-President of SFES (French Society of Health Economics)
Pr Christian HERVE Head of the Ethics and Scientific Integrity Department of Foch Hospital. University of Paris.