4.0 Review

MPOWER, needs and challenges: trends in the implementation of the WHO FCTC in the Eastern Mediterranean Region

Journal

EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN HEALTH JOURNAL
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 63-71

Publisher

WHO EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN REGIONAL OFFICE
DOI: 10.26719/2018.24.1.63

Keywords

Tobacco; smoking; media; noncommunicable diseases; control

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: WHO MPOWER aims to help countries prioritize tobacco control measures in line with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Objectives: This paper assessed the progress and challenges in implementing the 6 priority policies of MPOWER in countries of the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region since 2011. Methods: A checklist was developed and scores assigned based on the MPOWER indicators (maximum score 37). MPOWER data for the Region in the 2015 and 2017 tobacco control reports were extracted and scored. Data from similar analyses for 2011 and 2013 were also included. Countries were ranked by scores for each indicator for 2015 and 2017 and for overall scores for 2011 to 2017. Results: The Islamic Republic of Iran, Egypt and Pakistan had the highest scores in 2015 (33, 29 and 27 respectively) and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan and Yemen had the highest scores in 2017 (34, 31 and 27 respectively). The indicators with the highest and lowest combined score for all countries were for advertising bans and compliance with smoke-free policies: 67 and 18 respectively in 2015, and 73 and 15 respectively in 2017. Most countries (15/22) had higher total scores in 2017 than 2015: Afghanistan, Bahrain and Syrian Arab Republic had the greatest increases. The total score for the Region increased from 416 out of a maximum score of 814 in 2011 to 471 in 2017. Conclusions: Although notable achievements have been made in the Region, many challenges to policy implementation remain and require urgent action by governments of the countries of the Region.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available