Search

Many of medical anthropology's most pressing research questions require an understanding how infections, money, and ideas move around the globe. The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) is a $9 billion project that has delivered 20 billion doses of oral polio vaccine in campaigns across the world. With its array of global activities, it cannot be comprehensively explored by the traditional anthropological method of research at one field site. This article describes an ethnographic study of the GPEI, a collaborative effort between researchers at eight sites in seven countries. We developed a methodology grounded in nuanced understandings of local context but structured to allow analysis of global trends. Here, we examine polio vaccine acceptance and refusal to understand how global phenomena-in this case, policy decisions by donors and global health organizations to support vaccination campaigns rather than building health systems-shape local behavior.

Increasing coverage of routine immunisation and new vaccines is key to reaching Millennium Development Goal number four (MDG 4) on reducing child mortality. Malawi, despite a weak health system, is on track to achieve MDG 4, partly because of its high-performing immunisation programme. Among the early adopters of new vaccines, with major support from Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation, Malawi introduced pneumococcal vaccine in 2011 during a time of severe political and economic crisis. This exploratory case study (part of a larger research project on explaining differential immunisation coverage, conducted in 2010 and 2011, using primarily qualitative methods including in-depth interviewing) looks at the decision-making and policy process for vaccine introduction within the broader political–economic context. Based on a framework of benchmarks on preparedness of immunisation systems and assessments of integration with health systems, the study findings suggest that pneumococcal vaccine introduc...

BACKGROUND: After 2 decades of focused efforts to eradicate polio, the impact of eradication activities on health systems continues to be controversial. This study evaluated the impact of polio eradication activities on routine immunization (RI) and primary healthcare (PHC). METHODS: Quantitative analysis assessed the effects of polio eradication campaigns on RI and maternal healthcare coverage. A systematic qualitative analysis in 7 countries in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa assessed impacts of polio eradication activities on key health system functions, using data from interviews, participant observation, and document review. RESULTS: Our quantitative analysis did not find compelling evidence of widespread and significant effects of polio eradication campaigns, either positive or negative, on measures of RI and maternal healthcare. Our qualitative analysis revealed context-specific positive impacts of polio eradication activities in many of our case studies, particularly disease surveillance and cold chain strengthening. These impacts were dependent on the initiative of policy makers. Negative impacts, including service interruption and public dissatisfaction, were observed primarily in districts with many campaigns per year. CONCLUSIONS: Polio eradication activities can provide support for RI and PHC, but many opportunities to do so remain missed. Increased commitment to scaling up best practices could lead to significant positive impacts.

Background The impact of vertical programs on health systems is a much-debated topic, and more evidence on this complex relationship is needed. This article describes a research protocol developed to assess the relationship between the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, routine immunization, and primary health care in multiple settings. Methods/Design This protocol was designed as a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods, making use of comparative ethnographies. The study evaluates the impact of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative on routine immunization and primary health care by: (a) combining quantitative and qualitative work into one coherent study design; (b) using purposively selected qualitative case studies to systematically evaluate the impact of key contextual variables; and (c) making extensive use of the method of participant observation to create comparative ethnographies of the impact of a single vertical program administered in varied contexts. Discussion The study design has four major benefits: (1) the careful selection of a range of qualitative case studies allowed for systematic comparison; (2) the use of participant observation yielded important insights on how policy is put into practice; (3) results from our quantitative analysis could be explained by results from qualitative work; and (4) this research protocol can inform the creation of actionable recommendations. Here, recommendations for how to overcome potential challenges in carrying out such research are presented. This study illustrates the utility of mixed-methods research designs in which qualitative data are not just used to embellish quantitative results, but are an integral component of the analysis.

Using primary care as an example, this paper examines how the bureaucratic structures and culture of the international health agencies have affected the planning and delivery of health programs. Many primary health care programs were ineffective, as research undertaken in Nepal has shown, because they reflected the perspective and needs of the health bureaucracies involved rather than those of the local villages receiving services. Similarly, work in other South and Southeast Asian countries reveals that primary health care was interpreted differently in different bureaucratic settings and adapted to bureaucratic needs, but not necessarily adapted to village cultures and conditions. Social scientists, who are trained to analyze and articulate different cultural contexts, can play a key role in helping international health bureaucracies become more sensitive to the rural village cultures they serve.

Nepal's Assistant Nurse-Midwife program demonstrates some of the consequences of ignoring social and cultural information in health planning. Partly in response to national and international pressures to develop careers for women, the program was designed to train young women to provide maternal and child health care in rural areas. But traditional expectations about women, which are widely known, have impaired the program's effectiveness. Thus, even when cultural information is relevant and available—in fact, common knowledge—it still may not influence health planning. This case study pinpoints crucial planning issues in primary health care and recommends changes that could make the Assistant Nurse-Midwife's role more appropriate to its social and cultural setting.