Search

Background: Latin America (LATAM) encompasses a vast region with diverse populations. Despite publicly funded health care systems providing universal coverage, significant socioeconomic and ethno-racial disparities persist in health care access across the region. Breast cancer (BC) incidence and mortality rates in Brazil are comparable to those in other LATAM countries, supporting the relevance of Brazilian data, with Brazil's health care policies and expenditures often serving as models for neighboring countries. We evaluated the impact of mobility on oncological outcomes in LATAM by analyzing studies of patients with BC reporting commuting routes or travel distances to receive treatment or diagnosis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, LILACS, and Google Scholar databases. Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials and observational studies of patients with BC published in English, Portuguese, or Spanish and conducted in LATAM. The primary outcome was the impact of mobility or travel distance on oncological outcomes. Secondary outcomes included factors related to mobility barriers and access to health services. For studies meeting eligibility, relevant data were extracted using standardized forms. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Quantitative and qualitative evidence synthesis focused on estimating travel distances based on available data. Heterogeneity across distance traveled or travel time was addressed by converting reported travel time to kilometers traveled and estimating distances for unspecified locations. Results: Of 1142 records identified, 14 were included (12 from Brazil, 1 from Mexico, and 1 from Argentina). Meta-analysis revealed an average travel distance of 77.8 km (95% CI, 49.1-106.48) to access BC-related diagnostic or therapeutic resources. Nonetheless, this average fails to precisely encapsulate the distinct characteristics of each region, where notable variations persist in travel distance, ranging from 88 km in the South to 448 km in the North. Conclusion: The influence of mobility and travel distance on access to BC care is multifaceted and should consider the complex interplay of geographic barriers, sociodemographic factors, health system issues, and policy-related challenges. Further research is needed to comprehensively understand the variables impacting access to health services, particularly in LATAM countries, where the challenges women face during treatment remain understudied. Trial registration: CRD42023446936. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates a 10 million health worker shortage by 2030. Despite this shortage, some low-income African countries paradoxically struggle with health worker surpluses. Technically, these health workers are needed to meet the minimum health worker-population ratio, but insufficient job opportunities in the public and private sector leaves available health workers unemployed. This results in emigration and un- or underemployment, as few countries have policies or plans in place to absorb this excess capacity. Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea have taken a different approach; health authorities and/or public hospitals 'recruit' medical and nursing graduates on an unsalaried basis, promising eventual paid public employment. 50% Sierra Leone's health workforce is currently unsalaried. This scoping review examines the existing evidence on Sierra Leone's unsalaried health workers (UHWs) to establish what impact they have on the equitable delivery of care. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science were searched to identify relevant literature. Grey literature (reports) and Ministry of Health and Sanitation policy documents were also included. Results: 36 texts, containing UHW related data, met the inclusion criteria. The findings divide into two categories and nine sub-categories: Charging for care and medicines that should be free; Trust and mistrust; Accountability; Informal provision of care, Private practice and lack of regulation. Over-production of health workers; UHW issues within policy and strategy; Lack of personnel data undermines MoHS planning; Health sector finance. Conclusion: Sierra Leone's example demonstrates that UHWs undermine equitable access to healthcare, if they resort to employing a range of coping strategies to survive financially, which some do. Their impact is wide ranging and will undermine Sierra Leone's efforts to achieve Universal Health Coverage if unaddressed. These findings are relevant to other LICs with similar health worker surpluses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2019, the World Health Organization, set a target to halve the burden of snakebite, by 2030, and identified 'health systems strengthening' as a key pillar of action. In India, the country with most snakebite deaths, the Union Government identified (in September 2022) training of health workers as a priority action area. In this policy context, we provide empirical evidence by analysing the most recent nationwide survey data (District Level Household and Facility Survey − 4), to assess structural capacity and continuum of snakebite care in primary health care system in India. Methodology: We evaluated structural capacity for snakebite care under six domains: medicines, equipment, infrastructure, human resources, governance and finance, and health management information systems (HMIS). We categorised states (aspirant, performer, front-runner, achiever) based on the proportion of primary health centres (PHC) and community health centres (CHC), attaining highest possible domain score. We assessed continuum of snakebite care, district-wise, under five domains (connectivity to PHC, structural capacity of PHC, referral from PHC to higher facility, structural capacity of CHC, referral from CHC to higher facility) as adequate or not. Results: No state excelled (front-runner or achiever) in all six domains of structural capacity in PHCs or CHCs. The broader domains (physical infrastructure, human resources for health, HMIS) were weaker compared to snakebite care medicines in most states/UTs, at both PHC and CHC levels. CHCs faced greater concerns regarding human resources and equipment availability than PHCs in many states. Among PHCs, physical infrastructure and HMIS were aspirational in all 29 assessed states, while medicines, equipment, human resources, and governance and finance were aspirational in 8 (27.6%), 2 (6.9%), 17 (58.6%), and 12 (41.4%) states respectively. For CHCs, physical infrastructure was aspirational in all 30 assessed states/UTs, whereas HMIS, medicines, equipment, human resources, and governance and finance were aspirational in 29 (96.7%), 11 (36.7%), 27 (90%), 26 (86.7%), and 3 (10%) states respectively. No district had adequate continuum of snakebite care in all domains. Except for transport availability from CHC to higher facilities (48% of districts adequate) and transport availability from PHC to higher facilities (11% of districts adequate), fewer than 2% of districts were adequate in all other domains. Conclusion: Comprehensive strengthening of primary health care, across all domains, and throughout the continuum of care, instead of a piece-meal approach towards health systems strengthening, is necessitated to reduce snakebite burden in India, and possibly other high-burden nations with weak health systems. Health facility surveys are necessitated for this purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In order to reduce patient no-show, the Israeli government is promoting legislation that will allow Health Plans to require a co-payment from patients when reserving an appointment. It is hoped that this will create an incentive for patients to cancel in advance rather than simply not show up. The goal of this policy is to improve patient access to medical care and ensure that healthcare resources are utilized effectively. We explore this phenomenon to support evidence-based decision making on this issue, and to determine whether the proposed legislation is aligned with the findings of previous studies. Main body: No-show rates vary across countries and healthcare services, with several strategies in place to mitigate the phenomenon. There are three key stakeholders involved: (1) patients, (2) medical staff, and (3) insurers/managed care organizations, each of which is affected differently by no-shows and faces a different set of incentives. The decision whether to impose financial penalties for no-shows should take a number of considerations into account, such as the fine amount, service type, the establishment of an effective fine collection system, the patient's socioeconomic status, and the potential for exacerbating disparities in healthcare access. The limited research on the impact of fines on no-show rates has produced mixed results. Further investigation is necessary to understand the influence of fine amounts on no-show rates across various healthcare services. Additionally, it is important to evaluate the implications of this proposed legislation on patient behavior, access to healthcare, and potential disparities in access. Conclusion: It is anticipated that the proposed legislation will have minimal impact on attendance rates. To achieve meaningful change, efforts should focus on enhancing medical service availability and improving the ease with which appointments can be cancelled or alternatively substantial fines should be imposed. Further research is imperative for determining the most effective way to address the issue of patient no-show and to enhance healthcare system efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long waiting times for health care services are a prominent health policy issue. Waiting time guarantees may limit time to assessment and treatment. Methods: This study aims to investigate the information and support given to patients when the waiting time guarantee cannot be fulfilled from a care provider and administrative management perspective. Semi-structured interviews (N = 28) were conducted with administrative management and care providers (clinic staff and clinic line managers) in specialized clinics in the Stockholm Region, Sweden. Clinics were purposefully sampled for maximum variation in ownership (private, public), complexity of care, geographical location, volume of production, and waiting times. Thematic analysis was applied. Results: Care providers reported that patients received inconsistent information and support with regard to the waiting time guarantee and that information was not adapted to health literacy or individual patient needs. Contrary to local law, they made some patients responsible for finding a new care provider or arranging a new referral. Furthermore, financial interests affected whether patients were referred to other providers. Administrative management steered care providers' informing practices at specific time points (upon establishment of a new unit and after six months of operation). A specific regional support function, Region Stockholm's Care Guarantee Office, helped patients change care providers when long waiting times occurred. However, administrative management perceived that there was no established routine to assist care providers in informing patients. Conclusions: Care providers did not consider patients' health literacy when informing them about the waiting time guarantee. Administrative management's attempts to provide information and support to care providers are not producing the results they expect. Soft-law regulations and care contracts seem insufficient, and economic mechanisms undermine care providers' willingness to inform patients. The described actions are unable to mitigate the inequality in health care that arises from differences in care-seeking behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is often collateral damage to health systems during epidemics, affecting women and girls the most, with reduced access to non-outbreak related services, particularly in humanitarian settings. This rapid case study examines sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services in the Democratic Republic of the Congo when the COVID-19 hit, towards the end of an Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak, and in a context of protracted insecurity. Methods: This study draws on quantitative analysis of routine data from four health zones, a document review of policies and protocols, and 13 key-informant interviews with staff from the Ministry of Public Health, United Nations agencies, international and national non-governmental organizations, and civil society organizations. Results: Utilization of SRH services decreased initially but recovered by August 2020. Significant fluctuations remained across areas, due to the end of free care once Ebola funding ceased, insecurity, number of COVID-19 cases, and funding levels. The response to COVID-19 was top-down, focused on infection and prevention control measures, with a lack of funding, technical expertise and overall momentum that characterized the EVD response. Communities and civil society did not play an active role for the planning of the COVID-19 response. While health zone and facility staff showed resilience, developing adaptations to maintain SRH provision, these adaptations were short-lived and inconsistent without external support and funding. Conclusion: The EVD outbreak was an opportunity for health system strengthening that was not sustained during COVID-19. This had consequences for access to SRH services, with limited-resources available and deprioritization of SRH. Plain Language Summary: Women and girls often face increased challenges to accessing healthcare during epidemics on top of pre-existing health disparities. There is emerging evidence that COVID-19 has had negative impacts on the health of women and girls in sub-Saharan Africa due to diverted funding, reduced services, negative socioeconomic impacts, and increased or new barriers to access. In the DRC, COVID-19 hit shortly after the end of an Ebola epidemic within a context of protracted insecurity. This study used mixed methods and drew upon 13 interviews to examine the effects of COVID-19 on SRH services in North Kivu and how the health system did or did not adapt to ensure continued access and utilization of SRH services. There was limited prioritization of SRH during COVID-19. Although the government issued policies on how to adapt SRH services, these were developed centrally, without much guidance on how to operationalize these policies in different contexts. Consequently, healthcare providers and civil society actors developed their own ways to continue activities at local levels, not necessarily in a systematic way. There was limited longer-term strengthening of the health system that could adapt to the subsequent COVID-19 pandemic aside from increased capacity of healthcare providers to manage infection prevention and control measures. However, this was hampered by the lack of personal protective equipment that received no external support. Therefore, donors need to consider how resources can be leveraged to support sustained strengthening of the health system to be able to adapt to shocks even when resources are limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In fragile and conflict affected settings (FCAS) such as South Sudan, where health needs are immense, resources are scarce, health infrastructure is rudimentary or damaged, and government stewardship is weak, adequate health intervention priority-setting is especially important. There is a scarcity of research examining priority-setting in FCAS and the related political economy. Yet, capturing these dynamics is important to develop context-specific guidance for priority-setting. The objective of this study is to analyze the priority-setting practices in the Health Pooled Fund (HPF), a multi-donor fund that supports service delivery in South Sudan, using a political economy perspective. Methods: A multi-method study was conducted combining document review, 30 stakeholder interviews, and an examination of service delivery. An adapted version of the Walt and Gilson policy analysis triangle guided the study's design and analysis. Results: Priority-setting in HPF occurs in a context of immense fragility where health needs are vast, service delivery remains weak, and external funding is essential. HPF's service package gives priority to the health of mothers and children, gender-sensitive programming, immunization services, and a community health initiative. HPF is structured by a web of actors at national and local levels with pronounced power asymmetries and differing vested interests and ideas about HPF's role. Priority-setting takes place throughout program design, implementing partner (IP) contract negotiation, and implementation of the service package. In practice the BPHNS does not provide adequate guidance for priority-setting because it is too expansive and unrealistic given financial and health system constraints. At the local level, IPs must manage the competing interests of the HPF program and local health authorities as well as challenging contextual factors, including conflict and shortages of qualified health workers, which affect service provision. The resulting priority-setting process remains implicit, scarcely documented, and primarily driven by donors' interests. Conclusion: This study highlights power asymmetries between donors and national health authorities within a FCAS context, which drive a priority-setting process that is dominated by donor agendas and leave little room for government ownership. These findings emphasize the importance of paying attention to the influence of stakeholders and their interests on the priority-setting process in FCAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]