Health policy and planning最新文献

Improving access to abortion services has been coined a high priority by the Ethiopian Federal Ministry of Health. Nevertheless, many women are still struggling to access abortion services. The dedicated commitment to expanding abortion services by central authorities and the difficulties in further improving access to the services make for an interesting case to explore the real-life complexities of health priority setting. This article thus explores what it means to make abortion services a priority by drawing on in-depth interviews with healthcare bureaucrats and key stakeholders working closely with abortion service policy and implementation. Data were collected from February to April 2022. Health bureaucrats from 9 of the 12 regional states in Ethiopia and the Federal Ministry of Health were interviewed in addition to key stakeholders from professional organizations and NGOs. The study found that political will and priority to abortion services by central authorities were not necessarily enough to ensure access to the service across the health sector. At the regional and local level, there were considerable challenges with a lack of funding, equipment and human resources for implementing and expanding access to abortion services. The inadequacy of indicators and reporting systems hindered accountability and made it difficult to give priority to abortion services among the series of health programmes and priorities that local health authorities had to implement. The situation was further challenged by the contested nature of the abortion issue itself, both in the general population, but also amongst health bureaucrats and hospital leaders. This study casts a light on the complex and entangled processes of turning national-level priorities into on-the-ground practice and highlights the real-life challenges of setting and implementing health priorities.

Organizations that perform Health Policy and Systems Research (HPSR) need robust capacities, but it remains unclear what these organizations should look like in practice. We sought to define 'HPSRIs' (pronounced as 'hip-srees', i.e. 'Health Policy and Systems Research Institutions') as organizational models and developed a conceptual framework for assessing their capacities based on a set of attributes. We implemented a multi-method study in the Philippines that comprised: a qualitative analysis of perspectives from 33 stakeholders in the HPSR ecosystem on the functions, strengths and challenges of HPSRIs; a workshop with 17 multi-sectoral representatives who collectively developed a conceptual framework for assessing organizational capacities for HPSRIs based on organizational attributes; and a survey instrument development process that determined indicators for assessing these attributes. We defined HPSRIs to be formally constituted organizations (or institutions) with the minimum essential function of research. Beyond the research function, our framework outlined eight organizational attributes of well-performing HPSRIs that were grouped into four domains, namely: 'research expertise' (1) excellent research, (2) capacity-building driven; 'leadership and management' (3) efficient administration, (4) financially sustainable; 'policy translation' (5) policy orientation, (6) effective communication; and 'networking' (7) participatory approach, (8) convening influence. We developed a self-assessment instrument around these attributes that HPSRIs could use to inform their respective organizational development and collectively discuss their shared challenges. In addition to developing the framework, the workshop also analysed the positionality of HPSRIs and their interactions with other institutional actors in the HPSR ecosystem, and recommends the importance of enhancing these interactions and assigning responsibility to a national/regional authority that will foster the community of HPSRIs. When tailored to their context, HPSRIs that function at the nexus of research, management, policy and networks help achieve the main purpose of HPSR, which is to 'achieve collective health goals and contribute to policy outcomes'.

Providing social support to tuberculosis (TB) patients is a recommended strategy as households having TB patients find themselves in a spiral of poverty because of high cost, huge income loss and several other economic consequences associated with TB treatment. However, there are few examples of social support globally. The Indian government introduced the 'Nikshay Poshan Yojana' scheme in 2018 to provide nutritional support for all registered TB patients. A financial incentive of 500 Indian Rupee (6 United States Dollars) per month was proposed to be transferred directly to the registered beneficiaries' validated bank accounts. We examined the reach, timing, amount of benefit receipt and the extent to which the benefit alleviated catastrophic costs (used as a proxy to measure the impact on permanent economic welfare as catastrophic cost is the level of cost that is likely to result in a permanent negative economic impact on households) by interviewing 1482 adult drug-susceptible TB patients from 16 districts of four states during 2019 to 2023, using the methods recommended by the World Health Organization for estimating household costs of TB nationally. We also estimated the potential amount of social support required to achieve a zero catastrophic cost target. At the end of treatment, 31-54% of study participants received the benefit. In all, 34-60% of TB patients experienced catastrophic costs using different estimation methods and the benefit helped 2% of study participants to remain below the catastrophic cost threshold. A uniform benefit amount of Indian Rupee 10 000 (127 United States Dollars) for 6 months of treatment could reduce the incidence of catastrophic costs by 43%. To improve the economic welfare of TB patients, levels of benefit need to be substantially increased, which will have considerable budgetary impact on the TB programme. Hence, a targeted rather than universal approach may be considered. To maximize impact, at least half of the revised amount should be given immediately after treatment registration.

The Proactive Community Case Management (ProCCM) trial in Mali reinforced the health system across both arms with user fee removal, professional community health workers (CHWs) and upgraded primary health centres (PHCs)-and randomized village-clusters to receive proactive home visits by CHWs (intervention) or fixed site-based services by passive CHWs (control). Across both arms, sick children's 24-hour treatment and pregnant women's four or more antenatal visits doubled, and under-5 mortality halved, over 3 years compared with baseline. In the intervention arm, proactive CHW home visits had modest effects on children's curative and women's antenatal care utilization, but no effect on under-5 mortality, compared with the control arm. We aimed to explain these results by examining implementation, mechanisms and context in both arms We conducted a process evaluation with a mixed method convergent design that included 79 in-depth interviews with providers and participants over two time-points, surveys with 195 providers and secondary analyses of clinical data. We embedded realist approaches in novel ways to test, refine and consolidate theories about how ProCCM worked, generating three context-intervention-actor-mechanism-outcome nodes that unfolded in a cascade. First, removing user fees and deploying professional CHWs in every cluster enabled participants to seek health sector care promptly and created a context of facilitated access. Second, health systems support to all CHWs and PHCs enabled equitable, respectful, quality healthcare, which motivated increased, rapid utilization. Third, proactive CHW home visits facilitated CHWs and participants to deliver and seek care, and build relationships, trust and expectations, but these mechanisms were also activated in both arms. Addressing multiple structural barriers to care, user fee removal, professional CHWs and upgraded clinics interacted with providers' and patients' agency to achieve rapid care and child survival in both arms. Proactive home visits expedited or compounded mechanisms that were activated and changed the context across arms.

Strengthening management and leadership competencies among district and local health managers has emerged as a common approach for health systems strengthening and to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC). While the literature is rich with localized examples of initiatives that aim to strengthen the capacity of district or local health managers, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, considerably less attention is paid to the science of 'how' to scale-up these initiatives. The aim of this paper is thus to examine the 'process' of scaling-up a management strengthening intervention (MSI) and identify new knowledge and key lessons learned that can be used to inform the scale-up process of other complex health interventions, in support of UHC. Qualitative methods were used to identify lessons learned from scaling-up the MSI in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. We conducted 14 interviews with district health management team (DHMT) members, three scale-up assessments with 20 scale-up stakeholders, and three reflection discussions with 11 research team members. We also kept records of activities throughout MSI and scale-up implementation. Data were recorded, transcribed and analysed against the Theory of Change to identify both scale-up outcomes and the factors affecting these outcomes. The MSI was ultimately scaled-up across 27 districts. Repeated MSI cycles over time were found to foster greater feelings of autonomy among DHMTs to address longstanding local problems, a more innovative use of existing resources without relying on additional funding and improved teamwork. The use of 'resource teams' and the emergence of MSI 'champions' were instrumental in supporting scale-up efforts. Challenges to the sustainability of the MSI include limited government buy-in and lack of sustained financial investment.

The highly decentralized nature of global health governance presents significant challenges to conceptualizing and systematically measuring the agenda status of diseases, injuries, risks and other conditions contributing to the collective disease burden. An arenas model for global health agenda setting was recently proposed to help address these challenges. Further developing the model, this study aims to advance more robust inquiry into how and why priority levels may vary among the array of stakeholder arenas in which global health agenda setting occurs. We analyse order and the magnitude of changes in priority for eight infectious diseases in four arenas (international aid, scientific research, pharmaceutical industry and news media) over a period of more than two decades in relation to five propositions from scholarship. The diseases vary on burden and prominence in United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3 for health and well-being, including four with specific indicators for monitoring and evaluation (HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, hepatitis) and four without (dengue, diarrhoeal diseases, measles, meningitis). The order of priority did not consistently align with the disease burden or international development goals in any arena. Additionally, using new methods to measure the scale of annual change in resource allocations that are indicative of priority reveals volatility at the disease level in all arenas amidst broader patterns of stability. Insights around long-term patterns of priority within and among arenas are integral to strengthening analyses that aim to identify pivotal causal mechanisms, to clarify how arenas interact, and to measure the effects they produce.

At present, the world is off-track to meet the World Health Assembly global nutrition targets for 2025. Reducing the prevalence of stunting and low birthweight (LBW) in children, and anaemia in women, and increasing breastfeeding rates are among the prioritized global nutrition targets for all countries. Governments and development partners need evidence-based data to understand the true costs and consequences of policy decisions and investments. Yet there is an evidence gap on the health, human capital, and economic costs of inaction on preventing undernutrition for most countries. The Cost of Inaction tool and expanded Cost of Not Breastfeeding tool provide country-specific data to help address the gaps. Every year undernutrition leads to 1.3 million cases of preventable child and maternal deaths globally. In children, stunting results in the largest economic burden yearly at US$548 billion (0.7% of global gross national income [GNI]), followed by US$507 billion for suboptimal breastfeeding (0.6% of GNI), US$344 billion (0.3% of GNI) for LBW and US$161 billion (0.2% of GNI) for anaemia in children. Anaemia in women of reproductive age (WRA) costs US$113 billion (0.1% of GNI) globally in current income losses. Accounting for overlap in stunting, suboptimal breastfeeding and LBW, the analysis estimates that preventable undernutrition cumulatively costs the world at least US$761 billion per year, or US$2.1 billion per day. The variation in the regional and country-level estimates reflects the contextual drivers of undernutrition. In the lead-up to the renewed World Health Assembly targets and Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, the data generated from these tools are powerful information for advocates, governments and development partners to inform policy decisions and investments into high-impact low-cost nutrition interventions. The costs of inaction on undernutrition continue to be substantial, and serious coordinated action on the global nutrition targets is needed to yield the significant positive human capital and economic benefits from investing in nutrition.

There is a growing interest in studying and unpacking implementation of policies and programmes as it provides an opportunity to reduce the policy translation time lag taken for research findings to translate to policies and get implemented and understand why policies may fail. Realist evaluation is a theory-driven approach that embraces complexity and helps to identify the mechanisms generating the observed policy outcomes in given context. We aimed to study facilitators and barriers while implementing the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (COTPA) a comprehensive national tobacco control policy, and the National Tobacco Control Programme (NTCP), 2008 using realist evaluation. We developed an initial program theory (IPT) based on a realist literature review of tobacco control policies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). Three diverse states -Kerala, West Bengal, and Arunachal Pradesh- with varying degree of implementation of tobacco control law and program were chosen as case studies. Within the three selected states, we conducted in-depth interviews with 48 state and district-level stakeholders and undertook non-participant observations to refine the IPT. Following this, we organized two regional consultations covering stakeholders from 20 Indian states for a second iteration to further refine the program theory. A total of 300 Intervention-Context-Actor-Mechanism-Outcome (ICAMO) configurations were developed from the interview data, which were later synthesized into state-specific narrative program theories for Kerala, West Bengal and Arunachal Pradesh. We identified five mechanisms: collective action, felt accountability, individual motivation, fear, and prioritization that were (or were not) triggered leading to diverse implementation outcomes. We identified facilitators and barriers to implementing the COTPA and the NTCP, which have important research and practical implications for furthering the implementation of these policies as well as implementation research in India. In the future, researchers could build on the refined program theory proposed in this study to develop a middle-range theory to explain tobacco control policy implementation in India and other LMICs.

Setting reimbursement rates in national insurance schemes requires robust cost data. Collecting provider-generated cost accounting information is a potential mechanism for improving the cost evidence. To inform strategies for obtaining cost data to set reimbursement rates, this analysis aims to describe the role of cost accounting in public and private health sectors in India and describe the importance, perceived barriers and facilitators to improving cost accounting systems. In-depth interviews were conducted with 11 key informants. The interview tool guide was informed by a review of published and grey literature and government websites. The interviews were recorded as both audio and video and transcribed. A thematic coding framework was developed for the analysis. Multiple discussions were held to add, delete, classify or merge the themes. The themes identified were as follows: the status of cost accounting in the Indian hospital sector, legal and regulatory requirements for cost reporting, challenges to implementing cost accounting and recommendations for improving cost reporting by health care providers. The findings indicate that the sector lacks maturity in cost accounting due to a lack of understanding of its benefits, limited capacity and weak enforcement of cost reporting regulations. Providers recognize the value of cost analysis for investment decisions but have mixed opinions on the willingness to gather and report cost information, citing resource constraints and a lack of trust in payers. Additionally, heterogeneity among providers will require tailored approaches in developing cost accounting reporting frameworks and regulations. Health care cost accounting systems in India are rudimentary with a few exceptions, raising questions about how to source these data sustainably. Strengthening cost accounting systems in India will require standardized data formats, integrated into existing data management systems, that both meet the needs of policy makers and are acceptable to hospital providers.