BMJ Global Health最新文献

Background: Throughout the Syrian conflict, the Syrian government has intentionally attacked health facilities, violating International Humanitarian Law. Previous studies have qualitatively described health system disruptions following attacks on healthcare or established associations between armed conflict and health service utilisation, but there are no quantitative studies exploring the effects of health facility attacks. Our unprecedented study addresses this gap by quantifying the effects of health facility attacks on health service use during the Syrian conflict.

Methods: This retrospective observational study uses 18 537 reports capturing 2 826 627 consultations from 18 health facilities in northwest Syria and 69 attacks on these facilities. The novel study applies case time series design with a generalised non-linear model and stratification by facility type, attack mechanism and corroboration status.

Results: The study found significant, negative associations between health facility attacks and outpatient, trauma and facility births. On average, a health facility attack was associated with 51% and 38% reductions in outpatient, RR 0.49 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.57) and trauma consultations, RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.72), the day after an attack, with significant reductions continuing for 37 and 20 days, respectively. Health facility attacks were associated with an average 23% reduction in facility births, the second day after an attack, RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89), with significant reductions continuing for 42 days.

Conclusions: Attacks on health facilities in northwest Syria are strongly associated with significant reductions in outpatient, trauma and facility births. These attacks exacerbate the adverse effects of armed conflict and impede the fundamental right to health. The findings provide evidence that attacks on health facilities, violations of international humanitarian law by themselves, also negatively affect human rights by limiting access to health services, underscoring the need to strengthen health system resilience in conflict settings, expand systematic reporting of attacks on healthcare and hold perpetrators accountable.

Community engagement and local governance are important components of health interventions aiming to empower local populations. Yet, there is limited evidence on how to effectively engage with communities and codevelop interventions, especially in Southeast Asian contexts. Despite rapid progress, the Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR) still has high maternal and child mortality, with essential service coverage showing significant disparities across socioeconomic strata. Long-standing challenges in community health were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and reinforced by poor trust between users and health providers. However, the pandemic also provided an opportunity to develop approaches for enhanced community engagement and local governance capacity to tackle health inequities. The Community Network Engagement for Essential Healthcare and COVID-19 Responses through Trust (CONNECT) Initiative, developed by the Lao PDR government, WHO and partners, has resulted in initial positive outcomes in community health such as increased vaccination uptake, facility births and trust in health providers. This case study describes the iterative, adaptive process by which the CONNECT Initiative was developed, and how the core components, key stakeholders, theory of change and evaluation framework evolved from grounded observations and hypotheses. Lessons learnt include (1) awareness of entry points and existing structures to strengthen local governance for health through mutually beneficial intersectoral collaboration; (2) building relationships and trust with an adaptive, grounds-up approach for sustainability and scalability. As a model which can be adapted to other settings, this case study provides evidence on how to engage with communities, strengthen local governance and codevelop interventions towards greater health equity.

Background: Human resources are a key determinant for the quality of healthcare and health outcomes. Several human resource management approaches or practices have been proposed and implemented to better understand and address health workers' challenges with mixed results particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The aim of this framework synthesis was to review the human resources frameworks commonly available to address human resources for health issues in LMIC.

Methods: We searched studies in Medline, Embase, CAB Global Health, CINAHL (EBSCO) and WHO global Index Medicus up to 2021. We included studies that provided frameworks to tackle human resources for health issues, especially for LMICs. We synthesised the findings using a framework and thematic synthesis methods.

Results: The search identified 8574 studies, out of which 17 were included in our analysis. The common elements of different frameworks are (in descending order of frequency): (1) functional roles of health workers; (2) health workforce performance outcomes; (3) human resource management practises and levers; (4) health system outcomes; (5) contextual/cross-cutting issues; (6) population health outcomes and (7) the humanness of health workers. All frameworks directly or indirectly considered themes around the functional roles of health workers and on the outcomes of health workforce activities, while themes concerning the humanness of health workers were least represented. We propose a synthesised Human-Centred Health Workforce Framework.

Conclusions: Several frameworks exist providing different recurring thematic areas for addressing human resources for health issues in LMIC. Frameworks have predominantly functional or instrumental dimensions and much less consideration of the humanness of health workers. The paradigms used in policy making, development and funding may compromise the effectiveness of strategies to address human resources challenges in LMIC. We propose a comprehensive human resources for health framework to address these pitfalls.

Introduction: This study examines the impact of China's family doctor system (FDS) on healthcare utilisation and costs among diabetic patients with distinct long-term service utilisation patterns.

Methods: Conducted in City A, eastern China, this retrospective cohort study used data from the Health Information System and Health Insurance Claim Databases, covering diabetic patients from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2019.Patients were categorised into service utilisation trajectories based on quarterly outpatient visits to community health centres (CHCs) and secondary/tertiary hospitals from 2014 to 2017 using group-based trajectory models. Propensity score matching within each trajectory group matched FDS-enrolled patients (intervention) with non-enrolled patients (control). Difference-in-differences analysis compared outcomes between groups, with a SUEST test for cross-model comparison. Outcomes included outpatient visits indicator, costs indicator and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses.

Results: Among 17 232 diabetic patients (55.21% female, mean age 62.85 years), 13 094 were enrolled in the FDS (intervention group) and 4138 were not (control group). Patients were classified into four trajectory groups based on service utilisation from 2014 to 2017: (1) low overall outpatient utilisation, (2) high CHC visits, (3) high secondary/tertiary hospital visits and (4) high overall outpatient utilisation. After enrolled in FDS From 2018 to 2019, the group with high secondary/tertiary hospital visits saw a 6.265 increase in CHC visits (225.4% cost increase) and a 3.345 decrease in hospital visits (55.5% cost reduction). The high overall utilisation group experienced a 4.642 increase in CHC visits (109.5% cost increase) and a 1.493 decrease in hospital visits. OOP expenses were significantly reduced across all groups.

Conclusion: The FDS in China significantly increases primary care utilisation and cost, while reducing hospital visits and costs among diabetic patients, particularly among patients with historically high hospital usage. Policymakers should focus on enhancing the FDS to further encourage primary care usage and improve chronic disease management.

Health-related stigma plays a significant role in the burden of various health conditions such as neglected tropical diseases and mental illnesses, and undermines successful health outcomes. Stigmatised individuals can face lifelong socioeconomic consequences because of their condition. It is broadly recognised that culturally salient factors interact with the way stigma is expressed in different local contexts. This study aimed to capture cultural capabilities that shape health-related stigma in Indonesia, using the 'what matters most' (WMM) stigma framework. In this qualitative research, 15 in-depth interviews with experts in the field of Indonesian culture and health studies were conducted, followed by a group discussion. Data were collected between April and September 2021, and analysed using thematic content analysis. The analysis shows that cultural values such as communal participation in local networks and the 'shame culture' shapes experiences of stigma in Indonesia. Moreover, the participants explained that achieving full standing in the Indonesian context meant contributing to the collective interest and maintaining the family reputation. Personhood is also related to socially defined gender roles. For example, community participation was often influenced by patriarchal values, which lead to differences in access to life opportunities, while recognition in the family was often connected to complying with gender roles. This study contributes to research on the cultural shaping of health-related stigma involving the WMM framework in the Indonesian context. Future research should focus on the perspectives of those who are affected by stigmatised conditions and on integrating these insights in the assessment and reduction of health-related stigma.

Background: Substandard and falsified medicines (SFMs) are a public health concern of global importance. Postmarket surveillance in the form of medicine sampling and quality testing can prevent and detect SFM, however, there is remarkably scarce evidence about the cost and value for money of these activities: how much do they cost and how effective are they in detecting SFM?

Methods: Between February and October 2022, Systematic Tracking of At Risk Medicines (STARmeds) collected and analysed for quality 1274 samples of 5 medicines from physical and online retail outlets in 7 Indonesian districts. We collated data on the resources consumed by STARmeds, related to all stages of medicines sampling and quality testing including design, fieldwork and laboratory analysis. We used activity-based costing principles to calculate the financial and economic cost of medicine quality surveillance from the perspective of a hypothetical medicines' regulator. We calculated the cost per day and per week of fieldwork, per sample collected and per substandard sample. We used bootstrapping to capture uncertainty in the number of samples collected, by seller location type (urban, rural and online).

Results: The total cost of sampling and testing medicines from the market was US$712 964 (current 2022 values). Laboratory costs represented the largest share (70%), followed by other direct costs (12%) and indirect costs (7%). On average, it costs STARmeds US$479 (95% CI US$462 to US$516) to collect one medicine sample and US$5990 (95% CI US$5601 to US$6258) to identify one substandard sample.

Conclusion: Our findings bring urgently needed and novel information on the cost and value for money of medicine quality surveillance. These may support planning and budgeting of the Indonesian pharmaceutical regulator, but also of regulators and researchers elsewhere, particularly in low-income and middle-income settings, as well as international organisations with health regulation and quality of care remits.