Examine A WHO Global Health Issue And Compare The U.S. And O ✓ Solved

Examine a WHO global health issue and compare the U.S. and o

Examine a WHO global health issue and compare the U.S. and one other country. Select a WHO global health issue for study. For both the United States and the additional country: describe national/federal health policies adapted to the issue and compare them, explaining strengths and weaknesses; explain how social determinants of health affect the issue with specific examples; analyze how each government addresses cost, quality, and access for the issue and explain how these policies might affect global health; explain how the selected health policies impact the nursing role in each country and how global health issues affect local healthcare organizations and policies, with examples. Part 2: Create a plan for social change that incorporates a global perspective into your local practice and role as a nurse leader. Explain how you would advocate for incorporating a global perspective, how incorporation would impact your local practice and nursing leadership role, and how this contributes to social change. Use WHO global health agenda and evidence from the literature.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction and Selected Issue

The selected WHO global health issue is noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, and chronic respiratory disease (WHO, 2021). This paper compares U.S. approaches with those of India as a representative low- and middle-income country (LMIC). The analysis covers national policies, strengths and weaknesses, social determinants, cost/quality/access dimensions, effects on nursing roles, and the impact on local healthcare organizations. A plan for social change with a global lens for nurse leadership follows.

National/Federal Policies: United States

The U.S. addresses NCDs through a mixture of federal programs (CDC’s Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion programs), Medicare/Medicaid financing, and state-level public health initiatives (CDC, 2020). Strengths include strong surveillance systems, research infrastructure, and funding streams for prevention and chronic care management (Milstead & Short, 2019). Weaknesses include fragmented delivery across payers and states, inequities in access for uninsured or underinsured populations, and limited coordination of social services with healthcare (Donkin et al., 2017).

National/Federal Policies: India

India’s National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS) focuses on screening, risk-factor reduction, and primary-care integration (Government of India, 2018). Strengths include national policy recognition, integration into primary healthcare platforms, and large-scale public awareness campaigns. Weaknesses include underfunding, workforce shortages, uneven implementation across states, and limited access in rural areas (World Bank, 2019; Lancet analyses).

Comparative Strengths and Weaknesses

Comparatively, the U.S. excels in technology, treatment availability, and surveillance (CDC, 2020), while India emphasizes population-level prevention and primary-care integration but lacks resources for consistent implementation (Government of India, 2018). The U.S. fragmentation creates disparities despite resources, whereas India’s centralized policy faces operational challenges at the state and local levels (Donkin et al., 2017).

Social Determinants of Health and Examples

Social determinants—income, education, living conditions, food environment, and occupational exposures—drive NCD risk in both countries (Donkin et al., 2017). In the U.S., low-income communities face food deserts, higher tobacco density, and limited preventive care (CDC, 2020). In India, poverty, urban migration, air pollution, and limited health literacy increase NCD burdens, particularly in urban slums where risk factors and limited access to primary care converge (World Bank, 2019; Beaglehole et al., 2011).

Cost, Quality, and Access Analysis

Cost: The U.S. spends heavily on NCD treatment and tertiary care, raising per-patient costs and burdening patients without coverage (Milstead & Short, 2019). India relies more on out-of-pocket payments, creating catastrophic health expenditures for households seeking chronic-care services (World Bank, 2019).

Quality: The U.S. demonstrates high-quality specialty care but variable primary-care quality across regions and populations. India’s quality varies widely; tertiary centers may offer high-quality care, but primary-care quality is inconsistent (Lancet; Government of India, 2018).

Access: The U.S. has broad technological access but uneven insurance coverage; underinsured groups have limited preventive care (CDC, 2020). India faces geographic and financial barriers, with rural populations encountering supply shortages and long travel distances (World Bank, 2019).

Global impact: U.S. policy innovations (telehealth, clinical guidelines) can diffuse globally, but inequitable U.S. access models may widen global disparities if exported. India’s scalable primary-care approaches offer models for LMICs but require investment to be effective (WHO, 2021).

Impact on Nursing Roles

United States: Nurses serve in preventive care, chronic disease management, case management, and care coordination—roles expanded through advanced practice nursing and population health efforts (Milstead & Short, 2019). Policy shifts toward value-based care increase nurse-led care coordination and chronic-disease coaching responsibilities (Corless et al., 2018).

India: Nurses often perform screening, health education, and community outreach under NPCDCS, but workforce shortages and limited advanced-practice roles constrain impact. Task-shifting policies can empower nurses in community settings, but require training and supportive supervision (Government of India, 2018).

Local organizations: In both countries, global NCD priorities influence local clinic protocols, chronic-care pathways, and intersectoral partnerships (Donkin et al., 2017). Hospitals and primary-care centers must adapt workflows for population management and community engagement.

Plan for Social Change: Incorporating a Global Perspective

Goal: Incorporate a global perspective into local nursing leadership to reduce NCD inequities and strengthen prevention. Strategy components: 1) Education and capacity-building—integrate global NCD best practices into staff training, highlighting primary-prevention and social determinants (Milstead & Short, 2019); 2) Partnerships—establish twinning arrangements with LMIC clinics to exchange strategies for low-cost screening and community outreach (WHO, 2021); 3) Policy advocacy—work with health systems to adopt equity-focused policies (sliding-scale fees, community health worker integration) and advocate at state/local levels for social determinants interventions (Donkin et al., 2017); 4) Data-driven action—use disaggregated local data to identify disparities and target interventions.

Advocacy and Implementation as a Nurse Leader

Advocacy tactics include presenting evidence to administrators about cost-savings from prevention (Bloom & Cafiero-Fonseca, 2014), convening stakeholder coalitions (public health, social services), and piloting nurse-led chronic-disease management programs that integrate community health workers (Corless et al., 2018). Implementing telehealth and community screening adapted from global best practices can increase reach for underserved groups (WHO, 2021).

Impact on Local Practice and Social Change

Incorporating a global lens shifts practice from reactive, clinic-centered care to preventive, community-engaged approaches. Nurse leaders can reduce health inequities through programs addressing food access, workplace health, and targeted education—thereby addressing social determinants and achieving measurable improvements in NCD indicators (Donkin et al., 2017). Such changes contribute to social justice by aligning health services with population needs and by advocating for policy changes that redistribute resources to high-need communities.

Conclusion

Comparing U.S. and India responses to NCDs highlights complementary strengths: U.S. clinical capacity and surveillance, India’s population-level primary-care focus. Addressing social determinants, strengthening primary care, and empowering nurses through policy and training are central to global progress. Nurse leaders who adopt a global perspective can advocate for scalable, equity-focused interventions that produce social change locally and inform global practice (Milstead & Short, 2019; WHO, 2021).

References

• Beaglehole, R., et al. (2011). Priority actions for the non-communicable disease crisis. The Lancet.
• Bloom, D. E., & Cafiero-Fonseca, E. (2014). The global economic burden of NCDs. The Lancet.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2020). Chronic Diseases in America. https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease
• Corless, I. B., Nardi, D., Milstead, J. A., Larson, E., Nokes, K. M., Orsega, S., Kurth, A. E., & Woith, W. (2018). Expanding nursing’s role in responding to global pandemics. Nursing Outlook, 66(4), 412–415.
• Donkin, A., Goldblatt, P., Allen, J., Nathanson, V., & Marmot, M. (2017). Global action on the social determinants of health. BMJ Global Health, 3(1).
• Government of India. (2018). National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS). Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
• Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
• World Bank. (2019). India: Health sector overview. https://www.worldbank.org
• World Health Organization (WHO). (2021). Noncommunicable diseases. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases
• World Health Organization (WHO). (n.d.). Global health agenda. https://www.who.int