Search

Abstract Background Most children with developmental disabilities (DD) live in low- and middle-income countries, but access to services is limited, impacting their ability to thrive. Pilot study findings of the World Health Organization’s Caregiver Skills Training (WHO CST) intervention, which equips caregivers with strategies to facilitate learning and adaptive behaviours in children with DD, are promising but evidence from an appropriately powered trial delivered by non-specialist facilitators is lacking. This study will investigate the effectiveness and the resource impacts and costs and consequences of the WHO CST intervention in four sites in rural and urban Kenya and Ethiopia. Methods This is a 2-arm multi-site hybrid type-1 effectiveness implementation cluster randomised controlled superiority trial. After baseline assessments (T0) are completed by participants in clusters comprising 7 to 10 caregiver-child dyads, the clusters will be randomised to either the WHO CST intervention arm or a waitlist enhanced care as usual control arm. Further assessments will be completed at endpoint (T1, 18 ± 2 weeks after randomisation) and follow-up (T2, 44 ± 2 weeks after randomisation). The intervention comprises three individualised home visits and nine group sessions with trained non-specialist facilitators. Participants in the control arm will receive the intervention after completing follow-up assessments. We aim to recruit 544 child-caregiver dyads, evenly distributed across the two arms and countries. The co-primary outcomes are the child-focused Child Behavior Checklist (assessing emotional and behavioural problems) and the caregiver-focused Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (assessing caregiver quality of life), both assessed at endpoint. Secondary outcome measures comprise the two co-primary outcomes at follow-up and ten additional outcome measures at endpoint, assessing stigma-based experiences, depressive symptoms, household food insecurity, child disciplinary strategies and beliefs, CST knowledge and skill competencies, caregiver and child quality of life, social support, and children’s communication modes and functions. After quantitative follow-up assessments are completed, a mixed-methods evaluation approach will be used to investigate implementation processes and acceptability, feasibility, and potential sustainability of the intervention. Discussion The study’s findings will provide evidence of the effectiveness and resource impacts and costs and consequences of a non-specialist-delivered intervention in under-resourced contexts in one low-income and one middle-income country in East Africa. Findings will inform future research, intervention, and policy efforts to support children with DD and their families in under-resourced majority world contexts. Trial registration Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR202310908063134. Registered on October 16, 2023.

Abstract Essential Emergency and Critical Care (EECC) is a novel approach to the care of critically ill patients, focusing on first-tier, effective, low-cost, life-saving care and designed to be feasible even in low-resourced and low-staffed settings. This is distinct from advanced critical care, usually conducted in ICUs with specialised staff, facilities and technologies. This paper estimates the incremental cost of EECC and advanced critical care for the planning of care for critically ill patients in Tanzania and Kenya. The incremental costing took a health systems perspective. A normative approach based on the ingredients defined through the recently published global consensus on EECC was used. The setting was a district hospital in which the patient is provided with the definitive care typically provided at that level for their condition. Quantification of resource use was based on COVID-19 as a tracer condition using clinical expertise. Local prices were used where available, and all costs were converted to USD2020. The costs per patient day of EECC is estimated to be 1 USD, 11 USD and 33 USD in Tanzania and 2 USD, 14 USD and 37 USD in Kenya, for moderate, severe and critical COVID-19 patients respectively. The cost per patient day of advanced critical care is estimated to be 13 USD and 294 USD in Tanzania and USD 17 USD and 345 USD in Kenya for severe and critical COVID-19 patients, respectively. EECC is a novel approach for providing the essential care to all critically ill patients. The low costs and lower tech approach inherent in delivering EECC mean that EECC could be provided to many and suggests that prioritizing EECC over ACC may be a rational approach when resources are limited. Graphical Abstract

The financing of public health facilities influences their performance. A key feature that defines health facility financing is the degree of financial autonomy. Understanding the factors that influence public health facility financial autonomy is pertinent to developing strategies to addressing challenges that arise from constrained autonomy. In this paper, we apply a complexity lens to draw on a body of research that we have conducted in Kenya over the past decade, from the onset of devolution reforms, to unpack the determinants of public health facility financial autonomy in a context of decentralisation and provide suggestions for pertinent considerations when designing interventions to address financial autonomy challenges. We find that the factors that affect public health facility autonomy are not only structural, but also procedural, and political and interact in complex ways. These factors include; the public finance management (PFM) laws, sense-making by actors in the health system, political interests in control over resources, subnational level PFM capacity, PFM implementation bottlenecks and broader operational autonomy. Drawing from this analysis, we recommend that efforts at resolving public health facility financial autonomy include: PFM capacity development for subnational levels of government in decentralised settings, the use of a political lens that recognises interests and seeks to align incentives in engagement and solution finding for health facility financial autonomy, the audit of PFM processes to establish and resolve implementation bottlenecks that impinge on public health facility autonomy, and the resolution of operational autonomy to as a facilitator of financial autonomy.

Background A few studies have assessed the epidemiological impact and the cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in settings where most of the population had been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 infection.Methods We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 vaccine in Kenya from a societal perspective over a 1.5-year time frame. An age-structured transmission model assumed at least 80% of the population to have prior natural immunity when an immune escape variant was introduced. We examine the effect of slow (18 months) or rapid (6 months) vaccine roll-out with vaccine coverage of 30%, 50% or 70% of the adult (>18 years) population prioritising roll-out in those over 50-years (80% uptake in all scenarios). Cost data were obtained from primary analyses. We assumed vaccine procurement at US$7 per dose and vaccine delivery costs of US$3.90–US$6.11 per dose. The cost-effectiveness threshold was US$919.11.Findings Slow roll-out at 30% coverage largely targets those over 50 years and resulted in 54% fewer deaths (8132 (7914–8373)) than no vaccination and was cost saving (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, ICER=US$−1343 (US$−1345 to US$−1341) per disability-adjusted life-year, DALY averted). Increasing coverage to 50% and 70%, further reduced deaths by 12% (810 (757–872) and 5% (282 (251–317) but was not cost-effective, using Kenya’s cost-effectiveness threshold (US$919.11). Rapid roll-out with 30% coverage averted 63% more deaths and was more cost-saving (ICER=US$−1607 (US$−1609 to US$−1604) per DALY averted) compared with slow roll-out at the same coverage level, but 50% and 70% coverage scenarios were not cost-effective.Interpretation With prior exposure partially protecting much of the Kenyan population, vaccination of young adults may no longer be cost-effective.

Objectives COVID-19 has altered health sector capacity in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Cost data to inform evidence-based priority setting are urgently needed. Consequently, in this paper, we calculate the full economic health sector costs of COVID-19 clinical management in 79 LMICs under different epidemiological scenarios.Methods We used country-specific epidemiological projections from a dynamic transmission model to determine number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths over 1 year under four mitigation scenarios. We defined the health sector response for three base LMICs through guidelines and expert opinion. We calculated costs through local resource use and price data and extrapolated costs across 79 LMICs. Lastly, we compared cost estimates against gross domestic product (GDP) and total annual health expenditure in 76 LMICs.Results COVID-19 clinical management costs vary greatly by country, ranging between

Background User fees have been reported to limit access to services and increase inequities. As a result, Kenya introduced a free maternity policy in all public facilities in 2013. Subsequently in 2017, the policy was revised to the Linda Mama programme to expand access to private sector, expand the benefit package and change its management.Methods An interrupted time-series analysis on facility deliveries, antenatal care (ANC) and postnatal care (PNC) visits data between 2012 and 2019 was used to determine the effect of the two free maternity policies. These data were from 5419 public and 305 private and faith-based facilities across all counties, with data sourced from the health information system. A segmented negative binomial regression with seasonality accounted for, was used to determine the level (immediate) effect and trend (month-on-month) effect of the policies.Results The 2013 free-maternity policy led to a 19.6% and 28.9% level increase in normal deliveries and caesarean sections, respectively, in public facilities. There was also a 1.4% trend decrease in caesarean sections in public facilities. A level decrease followed by a trend increase in PNC visits was reported in public facilities. For private and faith-based facilities, there was a level decrease in caesarean sections and ANC visits followed by a trend increase in caeserean sections following the 2013 policy.Furthermore, the 2017 Linda Mama programme showed a level decrease then a trend increase in PNC visits and a 1.1% trend decrease in caesarean sections in public facilities. In private and faith-based facilities, there was a reported level decrease in normal deliveries and caesarean sections and a trend increase in caesarean sections.Conclusion The free maternity policies show mixed effects in increasing access to maternal health services. Emphasis on other accessibility barriers and service delivery challenges alongside user fee removal policies should be addressed to realise maximum benefits in maternal health utilisation.

Introduction We estimated unit costs for COVID-19 case management for patients with asymptomatic, mild-to-moderate, severe and critical COVID-19 disease in Kenya.Methods We estimated per-day unit costs of COVID-19 case management for patients. We used a bottom-up approach to estimate full economic costs and adopted a health system perspective and patient episode of care as our time horizon. We obtained data on inputs and their quantities from data provided by three public COVID-19 treatment hospitals in Kenya and augmented this with guidelines. We obtained input prices from a recent costing survey of 20 hospitals in Kenya and from market prices for Kenya.Results Per-day, per-patient unit costs for asymptomatic patients and patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 disease under home-based care are 1993.01 Kenyan shilling (KES) (US$18.89) and 1995.17 KES (US$18.991), respectively. When these patients are managed in an isolation centre or hospital, the same unit costs for asymptomatic patients and patients with mild-to-moderate disease are 6717.74 KES (US$63.68) and 6719.90 KES (US$63.70), respectively. Per-day unit costs for patients with severe COVID-19 disease managed in general hospital wards and those with critical COVID-19 disease admitted in intensive care units are 13 137.07 KES (US$124.53) and 63 243.11 KES (US$599.51).Conclusion COVID-19 case management costs are substantial, ranging between two and four times the average claims value reported by Kenya’s public health insurer. Kenya will need to mobilise substantial resources and explore service delivery adaptations that will reduce unit costs.