Health policy and planning最新文献

In low-and-middle income countries, maternal mental health needs remain neglected, and common mental disorders during pregnancy and after birth are routinely associated with hormonal changes. The psycho-social, and spiritual components of childbirth are often downplayed. A qualitative study was conducted as part of a wider realist evaluation on health systems responsiveness to examine the interrelationships between pregnant and postnatal women, their families, and their environment, and how these influence women's interactions with healthcare providers in Ghana. Data collection methods combined six qualitative interviews (n= 6) and 18 focus group discussions (n= 121) with pregnant and postnatal women, their relatives and health care providers (midwives, community mental health nurses) at the primary healthcare level. Data analysis was based on the Context-Mechanism-Outcome heuristic of realist evaluation methodology. A programme theory was developed and iteratively refined, drawing on Crowther's ecology of birth theory to unpack how context shapes women's interactions with public and alternative health care providers. We found that context interacts dynamically with embodiment, relationality, temporality, spatiality, and mystery of childbirth experiences, which in turn influence women's wellbeing in three primary areas. There is an intricate intersection of pregnancy with mental health impacting women's expectations of temporality, which does not always coincide with the timings provided by formal healthcare services. Societal deficiencies in social support structures for women facing economic challenges become particularly evident during the pregnancy and postnatal period, where women need heightened assistance. Socio-cultural beliefs associated with the mystery of childbirth, support the role of private providers in offering women a feeling of protection from uncertainty. Co-production of context specific interventions, including the integration of maternal and mental health policies, with relevant stakeholders can help formal healthcare providers accommodate women's perspectives on spirituality and mental health, which can subsequently help to make health system responsive to maternal mental health conditions.

The emergence of 'resilience' as a concept for analysing health systems - especially in low- and middle-income countries - has been trailed by debates on whether 'resilience' is a process or an outcome. This debate poses a methodological challenge. What 'health system resilience' is interpreted to mean shapes the approach taken to its analysis. To address this methodological challenge, we propose 'learning' as a concept versatile enough to navigate the 'process versus outcome' tension. Learning - defined as "the development of insights, knowledge, and associations between past actions, the effectiveness of those actions, and future actions" - we argue, can animate features that tend to be silenced in analyses of resilience. As with learning, the processes involved in resilience are cyclical: from absorption to adaptation, to transformation, and then to anticipation of future disruption. Learning illuminates how resilience occurs - or fails to occur - interactively and iteratively within complex systems while acknowledging the contextual, cognitive, and behavioural capabilities of individuals, teams and organizations that contribute to a system's emergence from or evolution given shocks/stress. Learning analysis can help to resist the pull towards framing resilience as an outcome - as resilience is commonly used to mean or suggest a state or an attribute, rather than a process that unfolds, whether the outcomes are deemed positive or not. Analysing resilience as a learning process can help health systems researchers better systematically make sense of health system responses to present and future stress/shocks. In qualitative or quantitative analyses, seeing what is to be analysed as 'learning' rather than the more nebulous 'resilience' can refocus attention in relation to what is to be measured, explained, and how - premised on the understanding that a health system with the ability to learn is one with the ability to be resilient, regardless of the outcome of such a process.

In Indonesia, primary health centres (PHCs) are mandated to provide essential medicines to ensure equal access to medication for all Indonesians, as stated in the national medicine policy. However, limited information is available regarding the actual practices of health workers within the context of decentralised governance. This paper investigates the discrepancies between national policies and local practices in two Indonesian districts, shedding light on coping mechanisms employed in each phase of medicine management within PHCs. The mixed-method study began by identifying pertinent policies addressing medicine management in PHCs. Subsequently, panel data on patient visits to tuberculosis, maternal and neonatal health (MNH) and non-communicable disease (NCD) services were collected from 2019 to 2022. After analysing the panel data, interviews were conducted with 56 health workers including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, midwives, and public health programme managers regarding their views on fluctuations in medicine stocks and the patient visits data. These participants included pharmacists and programme managers specialising in tuberculosis, MNH, and NCD care and were affiliated with PHCs and district health offices (DHO). Our findings highlight the occasional unavailability of essential medicines in PHCs, with stockouts being attributed to supplier shortages at provincial and national levels and to variations in the capacity of the local health system. Low-skilled pharmaceutical staff are a contributing factor in each phase of medicine management. Additionally, health workers employ coping mechanisms, such as deviating from policy on the use of capitation funds to purchase medicines, to manage temporary stockouts. To tackle systemic stockouts, central government should prioritise capacity-building among health workers, by establishing a continuous and easily accessible local learning system.

There is a widely held view that good management improves organisational performance. However, hospitals are complex organisations and the relationship between management practices and health service delivery is not straightforward. We conducted a global, systematic literature review of the quantitative evidence on the link between the adoption of management practices and quality of care in hospitals. We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, EconLit, Global Health and Web of Science on 16th October 2024, without language or country restrictions. We included empirical studies from January 1, 2000, onward, examining the quantitative association between hospital management practices and quality of care. Outcomes included structural quality (availability of resources such as drugs and equipment), clinical quality (adherence to guidelines), health outcomes and patient satisfaction or experience with care. In every study, each tested association was categorised as significantly positive (at the 5 percent level), null or significantly negative. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022301462). Of 11,731 articles, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria and had acceptable risk of bias. Studies were equally distributed between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, with 22 cross-sectional and three intervention studies. Of 111 associations, 55 (49.5%) were significantly positive, 1 (1%) was significantly negative, and 55 (49.5%) were null. Among associations tested, the majority were significantly positive for structural quality (79%), clinical quality (60%) and health outcomes (57%), while most associations between hospital management and patient satisfaction (80%) were null. The findings are mixed, with a similar proportion of positive and null associations between management practices and quality of care across studies. The evidence is limited by risk of bias introduced by non-randomised study designs. Evidence of positive associations in some settings warrants further investigation of the association through intervention studies or natural experiments. This could leverage methodological developments in quantitatively measuring management, highlighted by this review.

Sustainable and equitably contributed domestic health financing is essential for improving health and making progress towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. In this study, we explore the pathways through which development partners influence the mix of domestic health financing sources in Senegal. We performed a qualitative case study comprised of 32 key stakeholder interviews and a purposive document review, supplemented by descriptive statistical analysis of World Health Organization and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data on health financing sources in Senegal. We developed a novel framework to analyse the different mechanisms and directions of development partner influence on domestic health financing contributions. We identified development partner influence via four mechanisms: setting aims and standards, lobbying/negotiation, providing policy/technical advice, and providing external financing. Overall, development partners worked to increase tax-based government contributions and expand Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI), which is seemingly equity enhancing. Fungibility and intrinsic equity issues related to CBHI may however limit equity gains. We encourage stakeholders in the health financing sphere to use our framework and analysis to unpack how development partners affect domestic health financing in other settings. This could help identify dynamics that do not optimally enhance equity and support progress towards UHC, to help achieve more coherent policy-making across all domains of development partner activities in support of UHC. Future research should investigate the role of international creditors, lending and loan conditionalities on domestic health financing in recipient countries, including equity implications.

Health system resilience refers to the capacity of a health system to effectively anticipate, assimilate, adjust to and recuperate from unforeseen disruptions and pressures. Evidence indicates that low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have a double burden of dealing with the existing shortage of health resources in managing both non-emergency care and emergency care during epidemics. Intersectoral collaboration plays a pivotal role in managing crises such as pandemics. The World Health Organization has emphasized that effective intersectoral collaboration is vital for uninterrupted essential services during a pandemic. The study aimed to look at the collaborations entered into at various levels for managing the COVID-19 pandemic, taking as an example the municipal corporation in Ahmedabad, India. We undertook a qualitative study that involved conducting 52 in-depth interviews with officials from the health department, and other departments at the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC), including firefighting, estate, engineering and education, as well as private stakeholders. Many diverse observations were documented in this study as collaboration varied across the sectors. A lack of hospital beds and shortage of essential drugs and oxygen posed challenges for healthcare providers and provided an opportunity to collaborate with private stakeholders. Mandatory COVID testing and mobile units such as the Sanjivani van and Vadil ghar seva were examples of some of the initiatives taken by the AMC to manage the pandemic that were instigated and implemented with support from various departments such as education, engineering, tax, estate, animal husbandry and firefighting. Proper communication between public and private entities will result in unfragmented efforts to combat emergencies. Thus, a resilient health system is necessary as well as systematic intersectoral collaboration to ensure the uninterrupted delivery of essential health services during health emergencies.

The maldistribution of physicians, especially in rural areas, remains a global public health challenge. The internship programme for medical doctors is one of the efforts undertaken to address this issue. However, evidence aiming to disentangle this persistent challenge in the Indonesian context has been scant. This study aims to identify factors influencing medical doctors' intentions to practise in rural areas and how these factors affect their decisions. We adopted a sequential-explanatory mixed-method design using a validated questionnaire. Then, focus group discussions were conducted with medical doctors from three different regions (West, Central, and East) to gain in-depth understanding of motivations, intentions, and barriers to practising in rural areas. Participants were intern doctors who had been practising for at least six months in their internship locations. Quantitative analysis was based on a questionnaire addressing each factor, rated using 5-point Likert scales, with bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The qualitative results were analysed using thematic analysis. In total, 498 respondents completed the questionnaire where 9.6%, 49%, and 40.9% intend to practise in rural, suburban, and urban areas, respectively. Three factors were positively associated with a preference for rural practise: prior living experience in rural areas, accessibility to cultural centres and events, and personal savings as funding resources during medical school. However, the importance of "internet accessibility" was negatively associated with a preference for rural practise. Furthermore, the qualitative study involving 18 participants resulted in four main themes: the role of the internship programme in enhancing motivation as medical doctors; factors generally influencing the intention to practise; factors influencing the intention to practise in rural areas; and policy recommendations to increase the intention to practise in rural areas. Addressing the challenge of attracting and retaining medical doctors in rural areas requires multisectoral approaches involving both personal and professional factors.

India's healthcare landscape is characterized by a multitude of public and private healthcare providers, yet its health systems remain weak in many areas. Informal healthcare providers (IHPs) bridge this gap, particularly in rural India, and are deeply embedded within local communities. While their importance is widely recognized, there is a knowledge gap regarding the specifics of their social networks with actors in health systems. The aim of this study was to map the social networks of IHPs to elucidate the type and nature of their relationships, in order to explore opportunities for intersectoral collaboration to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). We have adopted the social network analysis (SNA) approach using qualitative ego-network methodology to evaluate the types and strengths of ties in the Indian Sundarbans. A total of 34 IHPs participated in the study. Qualitative data were analysed using NVivo10 and Kumu.io was used to visualize the social networks. Results show that the 34 IHPs had a total of 1362 ties with diverse actors, spanning the government, private sector and community. The majority of the ties were strong, with various motivating factors underpinning the relationships. Most of these ties were active and have continued for over a decade. The robust presence of IHPs in the Indian Sundarbans is attributable to the numerous, strong and often mutually beneficial ties. The findings suggest a need to reconsider the engagement of IHPs within formal health systems. Rather than isolation, a nuanced approach is required based on intersectoral collaboration capitalizing on these social ties with other actors to achieve UHC in impoverished and underserved regions globally.

Policy engagement is an essential component of implementation research for scaling up interventions targeting non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It refers to the many ways that research team members, implementers and policymakers, who represent government decision-making, connect and interact to explore common interests. Well-conducted engagement activities foster co-production, local contextualization and assist in the successful translation of research evidence into policy and practice. We aimed to identify the challenges and facilitators to policy engagement during the early implementation phase of scale-up research studies. This qualitative study was focused on the research projects that were funded through the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases in the 2019 round. Nineteen project teams opted to participate, with these studies implemented in 20 countries. Forty-three semi-structured stakeholder interviews, representing research, implementation and government were undertaken between August 2020 and July 2021. Transcripts were open-coded using thematic analysis to extract 63 codes which generated 15 themes reflecting both challenges and facilitators to undertaking policy engagement. Knowledge of the local government structures and trusting relationships provided the foundation for successful engagement and were strengthened by the research. Four cross-cutting concepts for engagement were identified and included: (1) the importance of understanding the policy landscape; (2) facilitating a network of suitable policy champions, (3) providing an environment for policy leaders to genuinely contribute to co-creation and (4) promoting two-way learning during researcher-policymaker engagement. We recommend undertaking formative policy analysis to gain a strategic understanding of the policy landscape and develop targeted engagement plans. Through engagement, researchers must facilitate cohesive vision and build a team of policy champions to advocate NCD research within their networks and spheres of influence. Ensuring equitable partnerships is essential for enabling local ownership and leadership. Further, engagement efforts must create a synergistic policymaker-researcher lens to promote the uptake of evidence into policy.