scholarly journals Decision-making and health system strengthening: bringing time frames into perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abelali Belghiti Alaoui ◽  
Vincent De Brouwere ◽  
Bruno Meessen ◽  
Maryam Bigdeli
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
Health Staff ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Abstract In many low-and middle-income countries, health systems decision-makers are facing a host of new challenges and competing priorities. They must not only plan and implement as they used to do but also deal with discontented citizens and health staff, be responsive and accountable. This contributes to create new political hazards susceptible to disrupt the whole execution of health plans. The starting point of this article is the observation by the first author of the limitations of the building-blocks framework to structure decision-making as for strengthening of the Moroccan health system. The management of a health system is affected by different temporalities, the recognition of which allows a more realistic analysis of the obstacles and successes of health system strengthening approaches. Inspired by practice and enriched thanks a consultation of the literature, our analytical framework revolves around five dynamics: the services dynamic, the programming dynamic, the political dynamic, the reform dynamic and the capacity-building dynamic. These five dynamics are differentiated by their temporalities, their profile, the role of their actors and the nature of their activities. The Moroccan experience suggests that it is possible to strengthen health systems by opening up the analysis of temporalities, which affects both decision-making processes and the dynamics of functioning of health systems.

scholarly journals Strengthening mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries: recommendations from the Emerald programme

BJPsych Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maya Semrau ◽  
Atalay Alem ◽  
Jose L. Ayuso-Mateos ◽  
Dan Chisholm ◽  
Oye Gureje ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health System ◽  
Human Resource Development ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
Mental Health Systems ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

BackgroundThere is a large treatment gap for mental, neurological or substance use (MNS) disorders. The ‘Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)’ (Emerald) research programme attempted to identify strategies to work towards reducing this gap through the strengthening of mental health systems.AimsTo provide a set of proposed recommendations for mental health system strengthening in LMICs.MethodThe Emerald programme was implemented in six LMICs in Africa and Asia (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda) over a 5-year period (2012–2017), and aimed to improve mental health outcomes in the six countries by building capacity and generating evidence to enhance health system strengthening.ResultsThe proposed recommendations align closely with the World Health Organization's key health system strengthening ‘building blocks’ of governance, financing, human resource development, service provision and information systems; knowledge transfer is included as an additional cross-cutting component. Specific recommendations are made in the paper for each of these building blocks based on the body of data that were collected and analysed during Emerald.ConclusionsThese recommendations are relevant not only to the six countries in which their evidential basis was generated, but to other LMICs as well; they may also be generalisable to other non-communicable diseases beyond MNS disorders.Declaration of interestNone.

scholarly journals 22.F. Workshop: What makes for resilient health systems? Evidence from the State of Health in the EU country profiles

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
The State ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
New Work ◽  
State Of Health ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The European Commission's State of Health in the EU (SoHEU) initiative aims to provide factual, comparative data and insights into health and health systems in EU countries. The resulting Country Health Profiles, published every two years (current editions: November 2019) are the joint work of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and the OECD, in cooperation with the European Commission. They are designed to support the efforts of Member States in their evidence-based policy making and to contribute to health care systems' strengthening. In addition to short syntheses of population health status, determinants of health and the organisation of the health system, the Country Profiles provide an assessment of the health system, looking at its effectiveness, accessibility and resilience. The idea of resilient health systems has been gaining traction among policy makers. The framework developed for the Country Profiles template sets out three dimensions and associated policy strategies and indicators as building blocks for assessing resilience. The framework adopts a broader definition of resilience, covering the ability to respond to extreme shocks as well as measures to address more predictable and chronic health system strains, such as population ageing or multimorbidity. However, the current framework predates the onset of the novel coronavirus pandemic as well as new work on resilience being done by the SoHEU project partners. This workshop aims to present resilience-enhancing strategies and challenges to a wide audience and to explore how using the evidence from the Country Profiles can contribute to strengthening health systems and improving their performance. A brief introduction on the SoHEU initiative will be followed by the main presentation on the analytical framework on resilience used for the Country Profiles. Along with country examples, we will present the wider results of an audit of the most common health system resilience strategies and challenges emerging from the 30 Country Profiles in 2019. A roundtable discussion will follow, incorporating audience contributions online. The Panel will discuss the results on resilience actions from the 2019 Country Profiles evidence, including: Why is resilience important as a practical objective and how is it related to health system strengthening and performance? How can countries use their resilience-related findings to steer national reform efforts? In addition, panellists will outline how lessons learned from country responses to the Covid-19 pandemic and new work on resilience by the Observatory (resilience policy briefs), OECD (2020 Health at a Glance) and the EC (Expert Group on Health Systems Performance Assessment (HSPA) Report on Resilience) can feed in and improve the resilience framework that will be used in the 2021 Country Profiles. Key messages Knowing what makes health systems resilient can improve their performance and ability to meet the current and future needs of their populations. The State of Health in the EU country profiles generate EU-wide evidence on the common resilience challenges facing countries’ health systems and the strategies being employed to address them.

scholarly journals What health systems do? Functions as a starting point to assess health systems performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Irini Papanicolas
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Performance Assessment ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Common Framework ◽  
System Assessment ◽  
Health Systems Performance ◽  
Health System Building Blocks

Abstract Health system assessment (HSA) tools are often built around static health system building blocks, which lead to largely descriptive narrative and lack of linkages to health system outcomes. The development of a common framework that would also focus on performance outcomes is long overdue. We analysed the key HSA frameworks and tools based on them, with the purpose of identifying a common approach that would allow to link health system components to specific outcomes. The presentation will focus on using the health system functions as the basis of conducting the performance assessment. In a second step, the presentation will elaborate on the intermediate and final health system goals as part of the HSPA framework. It will explain their links to the four functions and thus, discuss their relevance for performance assessment.

Considering Health-Systems Constraints in Economic Evaluation in Low- and Middle-Income Settings

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Vassall ◽  
Fiammetta Bozzani ◽  
Kara Hanson
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
System Thinking ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Analytical Approaches ◽  
Low And Middle Income

In order to secure effective service access, coverage, and impact, it is increasingly recognized that the introduction of novel health technologies such as diagnostics, drugs, and vaccines may require additional investment to address the constraints under which many health systems operate. Health-system constraints include a shortage of health workers, ineffective supply chains, or inadequate information systems, or organizational constraints such as weak incentives and poor service integration. Decision makers may be faced with the question of whether to invest in a new technology, including the specific health system strengthening needed to ensure effective implementation; or they may be seeking to optimize resource allocation across a range of interventions including investment in broad health system functions or platforms. Investment in measures to address health-system constraints therefore increasingly need to undergo economic evaluation, but this poses several methodological challenges for health economists, particularly in the context of low- and middle-income countries. Designing the appropriate analysis to inform investment decisions concerning new technologies incorporating health systems investment can be broken down into several steps. First, the analysis needs to comprehensively outline the interface between the new intervention and the system through which it is to be delivered, in order to identify the relevant constraints and the measures needed to relax them. Second, the analysis needs to be rooted in a theoretical approach to appropriately characterize constraints and consider joint investment in the health system and technology. Third, the analysis needs to consider how the overarching priority- setting process influences the scope and output of the analysis informing the way in which complex evidence is used to support the decision, including how to represent and manage system wide trade-offs. Finally, there are several ways in which decision analytical models can be structured, and parameterized, in a context of data scarcity around constraints. This article draws together current approaches to health system thinking with the emerging literature on analytical approaches to integrating health-system constraints into economic evaluation to guide economists through these four issues. It aims to contribute to a more health-system-informed approach to both appraising the cost-effectiveness of new technologies and setting priorities across a range of program activities.

scholarly journals Effective methods for knowledge transfer to strengthen mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries

BJPsych Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose L. Ayuso-Mateos ◽  
Maria Miret ◽  
Pilar Lopez-Garcia ◽  
Atalay Alem ◽  
Dan Chisholm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
Mental Health Systems ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Background The Emerald project's focus is on how to strengthen mental health systems in six low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda). This was done by generating evidence and capacity to enhance health system performance in delivering mental healthcare. A common problem in scaling-up interventions and strengthening mental health programmes in LMICs is how to transfer research evidence, such as the data collected in the Emerald project, into practice. Aims To describe how core elements of Emerald were implemented and aligned with the ultimate goal of strengthening mental health systems, as well as their short-term impact on practices, policies and programmes in the six partner countries. Method We focused on the involvement of policy planners, managers, patients and carers. Results Over 5 years of collaboration, the Emerald consortium has provided evidence and tools for the improvement of mental healthcare in the six LMICs involved in the project. We found that the knowledge transfer efforts had an impact on mental health service delivery and policy planning at the sites and countries involved in the project. Conclusions This approach may be valid beyond the mental health context, and may be effective for any initiative that aims at implementing evidence-based health policies for health system strengthening.

scholarly journals Live-in migrant care worker arrangements in Germany and the Netherlands: motivations and justifications in family decision-making

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Horn ◽  
Cornelia Schweppe ◽  
Anita Böcker ◽  
María Bruquetas-Callejo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Private Households ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Family Decision Making ◽  
Care Worker

Private households in ageing societies increasingly employ live-in migrant carers (LIMCs) to care for relatives in need of 24/7 care and supervision. Whilst LIMC arrangements are a common practice in Germany, they are only recently emerging in the Netherlands. Taking this development as a starting point, this study uses the countries’ different long-term care (LTC) regimes as the analytical framework to explore and compare the motivations and justifications of German and Dutch family carers who opt for an LIMC arrangment. Findings show that Dutch and German LTC regimes impact differently the decision-making processes of families, as well as on patterns of justification, through a combination of policies and social norms and their related expectations towards care and care work in old age.

scholarly journals Health system strengthening for mental health in low- and middle-income countries: introduction to the Emerald programme

BJPsych Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Thornicroft ◽  
Maya Semrau
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
Mental Health Systems ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Summary This paper gives an overview of the Emerald (Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries) programme and introduces the subsequent seven papers in this BJPsych Open thematic series. The aims of the Emerald research programme were to improve mental health outcomes in six low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), namely Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda, by building capacity and by generating evidence to enhance health system strengthening in these six countries. The longer-term aim is to improve mental healthcare, and so contribute to a reduction in the large treatment gap that exists for mental disorders. This series includes papers describing the following components of the Emerald programme: (a) capacity building; (b) mental health financing; (c) integrated care (d) mental health information systems; and (e) knowledge transfer. We also include a cross-cutting paper with recommendations from the Emerald programme as a whole. The inclusion of clear mental-health-related targets and indicators within the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals now intensifies the need for strong evidence about both how to provide effective treatments, and how to deliver these treatments within robust health systems.

scholarly journals The impact of economic sanctions on health and health systems in low- and middle-income countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Suhrcke ◽  
M Pinna Pintor ◽  
C Hamelmann
Keyword(s):  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Financial Flows ◽  
Adverse Health ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Economic sanctions, understood as measures taken by one state or a group of states to coerce another into a desired conduct (eg by restricting trade and financial flows) do not primarily seek to adversely affect the health or health system of the target country's population. Yet, there may be indirect or unintended health and health system consequences that ought to be borne in mind when assessing the full set of effects of sanctions. We take stock of the evidence to date in terms of whether - and if so, how - economic sanctions impact health and health systems in LMICs. Methods We undertook a structured literature review (using MEDLINE and Google Scholar), covering the peer-reviewed and grey literature published from 1970-2019, with a specific focus on quantitative assessments. Results Most studies (23/27) that met our inclusion criteria focus on the relationship between sanctions and health outcomes, ranging from infant or child mortality as the most frequent case over viral hepatitis to diabetes and HIV, among others. Fewer studies (9/27) examined health system related indicators, either as a sole focus or jointly with health outcomes. A minority of studies explicitly addressed some of the methodological challenges, incl. control for relevant confounders and the endogeneity of sanctions. Taking the results at face value, the evidence is almost unanimous in highlighting the adverse health and health system effects of economic sanctions. Conclusions Quantitatively assessing the impact of economic sanctions on health or health systems is a challenging task, not least as it is persistently difficult to disentangle the effect of sanctions from many other, potentially major factors at work that matter for health (as, for instance, war). In addition, in times of severe economic and political crisis (which often coincide with sanctions), the collection of accurate and comprehensive data that could allow appropriate measurement is typically not a priority. Key messages The existing evidence is almost unanimous in highlighting the adverse health and health system effects of economic sanctions. There is preciously little good quality evidence on the health (system) impact of economic sanctions.

scholarly journals Health system gaps in cardiovascular disease prevention and management in Nepal

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Archana Shrestha ◽  
Rashmi Maharjan ◽  
Biraj Man Karmacharya ◽  
Swornim Bajracharya ◽  
Niharika Jha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Resources ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
National Health ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Health Spending ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Critical System ◽  
Government Organizations ◽  
The Government

Abstract Background Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of deaths and disability in Nepal. Health systems can improve CVD health outcomes even in resource-limited settings by directing efforts to meet critical system gaps. This study aimed to identify Nepal’s health systems gaps to prevent and manage CVDs. Methods We formed a task force composed of the government and non-government representatives and assessed health system performance across six building blocks: governance, service delivery, human resources, medical products, information system, and financing in terms of equity, access, coverage, efficiency, quality, safety and sustainability. We reviewed 125 national health policies, plans, strategies, guidelines, reports and websites and conducted 52 key informant interviews. We grouped notes from desk review and transcripts’ codes into equity, access, coverage, efficiency, quality, safety and sustainability of the health system. Results National health insurance covers less than 10% of the population; and more than 50% of the health spending is out of pocket. The efficiency of CVDs prevention and management programs in Nepal is affected by the shortage of human resources, weak monitoring and supervision, and inadequate engagement of stakeholders. There are policies and strategies in place to ensure quality of care, however their implementation and supervision is weak. The total budget on health has been increasing over the past five years. However, the funding on CVDs is negligible. Conclusion Governments at the federal, provincial and local levels should prioritize CVDs care and partner with non-government organizations to improve preventive and curative CVDs services.

scholarly journals Resilience Testing of Health Systems: How Can It Be Done?

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 4742
Author(s):  
Heather L. Rogers ◽  
Pedro Pita Barros ◽  
Jan De Maeseneer ◽  
Lasse Lehtonen ◽  
Christos Lionis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Action Planning ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
System Transformation ◽  
Traffic Light ◽  
Phase 0 ◽  
Five Phases ◽  
Quantitative Indicators

The resilience of health systems has received considerable attention as of late, yet little is known about what a resilience test might look like. We develop a resilience test concept and methodology. We describe key components of a toolkit and a 5-phased approach to implementation of resilience testing that can be adapted to individual health systems. We develop a methodology for a test that is balanced in terms of standardization and system-specific characteristics/needs. We specify how to work with diverse stakeholders from the health ecosystem via participatory processes to assess and identify recommendations for health system strengthening. The proposed resilience test toolkit consists of “what if” adverse scenarios, a menu of health system performance elements and indicators based on an input-output-outcomes framework, a discussion guide for each adverse scenario, and a traffic light scorecard template. The five phases of implementation include Phase 0, a preparatory phase to adapt the toolkit materials; Phase 1: facilitated discussion groups with stakeholders regarding the adverse scenarios; Phase 2: supplemental data collection of relevant quantitative indicators; Phase 3: summarization of results; Phase 4: action planning and health system transformation. The toolkit and 5-phased approach can support countries to test resilience of health systems, and provides a concrete roadmap to its implementation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document