Search

Background: In the last decade, the health status of Afghans has improved drastically. However, the health financing system in Afghanistan remains fragile due to high out-of-pocket spending and reliance on donor funding. To address the country's health financing challenges, the Ministry of Public Health investigated health insurance as a mechanism to mobilize resources for health. This paper presents stakeholders' opinions on seven preconditions of implementing this approach, as their understanding and buy-in to such an approach will determine its success.Methods: Key informant interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with stakeholders. The interviews focused on perceptions of the seven preconditions of introducing health insurance, and adapting a framework developed by the International Labor Organization. Content analysis was conducted after interviews and discussions were transcribed and coded.Results: Almost all of the stakeholders from government agencies, the private sector, and development partners are interested in introducing health insurance in Afghanistan, and they were aware of the challenges of the country's health financing system. Stakeholders acknowledged that health insurance could be an instrument to address these challenges. However, stakeholders differed in their beliefs about how and when to initiate a health insurance scheme. In addition to increasing insecurity in the country, they saw a lack of clear legal guidance, low quality of healthcare services, poor awareness among the population, limited technical capacity, and challenges to willingness to pay as the major barriers to establishing a successful nationwide health insurance scheme.Conclusions: The identified barriers prevent Afghanistan from establishing health insurance in the short term. Afghanistan must progressively address these major impediments in order to build a health insurance system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Afghanistan has made great strides in the coverage of health services across the country but coverage of key indicators remains low nationally and whether the poorest households are accessing these services is not well understood.Methods: We analyzed the Afghanistan Mortality Survey 2010 on utilization of inpatient and outpatient care, institutional delivery and antenatal care by wealth quintiles. Concentration indexes (CIs) were generated to measure the inequality of using the four services. Additional analyses were conducted to examine factors that explain the health inequalities (e.g. age, gender, education and residence).Results: Among households reporting utilization of health services, public health facilities were used more often for inpatient care, while they were used less for outpatient care. Overall, the utilization of inpatient and outpatient care, and antenatal care was equally distributed among income groups, with CIs of 0.04, 0.03 and 0.08, respectively. However, the poor used more public facilities while the wealthy used more private facilities. There was a substantial inequality in the use of institutional delivery services, with a CI of 0.31. Poorer women had a lower rate of institutional deliveries overall, in both public and private facilities, compared to the wealthy. Location was an important factor in explaining the inequality in the use of health services.Conclusions: The large gap between the rich and poor in access to and utilization of key maternal services, such as institutional delivery, may be a central factor to the high rates of maternal mortality and morbidity and impedes efforts to make progress toward universal health coverage. While poorer households use public health services more often, the use of public facilities for outpatient visits remains half that of private facilities. Pro-poor targeting as well as a better understanding of the private sector's role in increasing equitable coverage of maternal health services is needed. Equity-oriented approaches in health should be prioritized to promote more inclusive health system reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A shift in the culture and practice of health and development research is required to maximise the real-world use of evidence by non-academic or non-research-oriented audiences. Many frameworks have been developed to guide and measure the research utilisation process, yet none have been widely applied. Some frameworks are simplified to an unrealistic linear representation while others are rendered overly complex and unusable in an attempt to capture all aspects of the research utilisation process. Additionally, many research utilisation frameworks have focused on the policy development process or within a clinical setting, with less application of the translation process at the programme level. In response to this gap - and drawing from over a decade of experience implementing research utilisation strategies - we developed a simple, four-phase framework to guide global health and development efforts that seek to apply evidence to policies and programmes. We present a detailed description of each phase in our framework, with examples of its relevance and application illustrated through our own case study experiences in global health. We believe the utility of this framework extends beyond the health sector and is relevant for maximising use of evidence to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Background: While many of these agents have been compared in prospective clinical trials, the gemcitabine/platinumbased regimens have not been compared in a prospective, randomized clinical trial. While bothgemcitabine/carboplatin and gemcitabine/cisplatin have a similar ORR in separate clinical trials, the tworegimens have never been directly been compared. With overlapping dose-limiting toxicity of thrombocytopenia, the gemcitabine/carboplatin regimen has been challenging to employ in the clinical setting in previously treated ovarian cancer patients and is often associated with treatment delays and/or dose reductions. Gemcitabine/cisplatin can also be a challenge due to its dose limiting neuropathy and renal toxicity, especially in previously treated patients. In the absence of any prospective, head to head comparison this retrospective study was embarked upon to compare the response rate and toxicity profiles of gemcitabine/cisplatin verses gemcitabine/carboplatin for the treatment of platinum-sensitive verses platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer., Methods: This was a retrospective chart review study that identified patients that had received either gemcitabine/cisplatin or gemcitabine/carboplatin for treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer and compared documented hematological and non-hematological toxicity and response based on RECIST (v1.1). Data was evaluated based upon platinum sensitivity/resistance as well., Results: A total of 93 patients were identified that had received a gemcitabine/platinum regimen with 48 with recurrent ovarian cancer that were included in the study. There were 21 patients in the gemcitabine/cisplatin arm and 27 patients identified in the gemcitabine/carboplatin arm. Objective response rate (ORR) was greater in platinum-sensitive patients that received gemcitabine/carboplatin compared to gemcitabine/cisplatin (8 (67%) vs 2 (25%), p  < 0.05). Conversely, ORR was greater in platinum-resistant patients treated with gemcitabine/cisplatin (4 (57%) vs 1 (25%), NS). Mean time to progression was greater in gemcitabine/cisplatin patients (7.2 vs 5.1 months, p  < 0.03). Patients treated with gemcitabine/carboplatin discontinued due to toxicity at a greater rate (8 (33%) vs 5 (24%)). Specifically gemcitabine/carboplatin had a greater incidence (85%) of grade 2 or greater leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia compared to gemcitabine/cisplatin (19%) However, there was no significant difference in dose reductions, treatment delays, or granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration between regimens., Conclusions: Gemcitabine/cisplatin appears to have greater efficacy in platinum-resistant patients, while gemcitabine/carboplatin seems to have greater efficacy in platinum-sensitive patients. Overall, gemcitabine/carboplatin was associated with a greater incidence of myelosuppression and discontinuation due to toxicity. Similar to findings in endometrial cancer, gemcitabine/cisplatin may have benefit specifically in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Background: In the last decade, the health status of Afghans has improved drastically. However, the health financing system in Afghanistan remains fragile due to high out-of-pocket spending and reliance on donor funding. To address the country's health financing challenges, the Ministry of Public Health investigated health insurance as a mechanism to mobilize resources for health. This paper presents stakeholders' opinions on seven preconditions of implementing this approach, as their understanding and buy-in to such an approach will determine its success., Methods: Key informant interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with stakeholders. The interviews focused on perceptions of the seven preconditions of introducing health insurance, and adapting a framework developed by the International Labor Organization. Content analysis was conducted after interviews and discussions were transcribed and coded., Results: Almost all of the stakeholders from government agencies, the private sector, and development partners are interested in introducing health insurance in Afghanistan, and they were aware of the challenges of the country's health financing system. Stakeholders acknowledged that health insurance could be an instrument to address these challenges. However, stakeholders differed in their beliefs about how and when to initiate a health insurance scheme. In addition to increasing insecurity in the country, they saw a lack of clear legal guidance, low quality of healthcare services, poor awareness among the population, limited technical capacity, and challenges to willingness to pay as the major barriers to establishing a successful nationwide health insurance scheme., Conclusions: The identified barriers prevent Afghanistan from establishing health insurance in the short term. Afghanistan must progressively address these major impediments in order to build a health insurance system.