Comparative Perspectives on Health Governance as Political Practice: A Commentary.

Global health governance and the World Bank

Health systems in an emerging economy, specifically Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are characterized as fragile with low implementation of Universal Health Coverage. While acknowledging that the cause of the inadequacy in emerging economies is multi-factorial, other arguments are that the root cause is inadequate political and technical leadership. Evidence reveals that visionary, imaginative, decisive, responsible, and responsive leadership is insufficient to persuade all stakeholders in low-income nations in Sub-Saharan Africa to work together to attain the constructive goal of universal coverage. On the contrary, other academics suggest that successful leadership would establish a clear national vision for universal coverage and a commitment to achieving that objective over time. These contrasting observations motivated an interrogation of the link between health system governance and Universal Health Coverage in an emerging economy taking evidence from the PHSSA programme. Through a meta-analysis of the existing literature as well as analysis of the findings from the programme, the paper explores experiences, critical success factors and recommendations for improvement of UHC through institutionalizing health system governance in an emerging economy. The research provides evidence that the governance linkages in health systems and the outcomes they produce are contingent rather than assured, due to the variety and complexity inherent in the health system governance paradigm. The situation-specific setting of a country's health system determines what can be accomplished through health governance strategy design and implementation efforts. The paper recommends a need to create a conducive environment for adoption of health systems programmes by contextualizing health governance with regard to the larger set of governance institutions that surround it. A competency framework should also be adopted in recruitment of competent health managers. The study also recommends a need for the countries in seeking to institutionalize health system governance to develop and support an organizational structure and context that sustains leadership practices through advocacy, create an enabling environment for health systems leadership, management and governance through the development of ethics and other competences specific to universal health care situations as well as provide proper financial support system so that institutionalization of leadership, management and governance can have maximum impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of health systems. There is also a need to institutionalize short courses, seminars and conferences in health leadership, management, and governance so as to entrench participatory leadership in health systems.

The impacts of health care investments in developing and transition countries are typically measured by inputs and general health outcomes. Missing from the health agenda are measures of performance that reflect whether health systems are meeting their objectives; public resources are being used appropriately; and the priorities of governments are being implemented. This paper suggests that good governance is central to raising performance in health care delivery. Crucial to high performance are standards, information, incentives and accountability. This paper provides a definition of good governance in health and a framework for thinking about governance issues as a way of improving performance in the health sector. Performance indicators that offer the potential for tracking relative health performance are proposed, and provide the context for the discussion of good governance in health service delivery in the areas of budget and resource management, individual provider performance, health facility performance, informal payments, and corruption perceptions. What we do and do not know about effective solutions to advance good governance and performance in health is presented for each area, drawing on existing research and documented experiences.

By the time the present study was completed, Brazil had been the second epicenter of COVID-19. In addition, the actions taken to respond to the pandemic in Brazil were the subject of extensive debate, since the Federal Government diverged from most recommendations from health authorities and scientists. Since then, the resulting political and social turmoil showed conflicting strategies to tackle the pandemic in Brazil, with visible consequences in the numbers of casualties, but also with effects on the resilience of the overall health system.This article explores the actions taken in Brazil to cope with the pandemic from a systems analysis perspective. The structure of the domain was analyzed using work domain analysis, and the activated functions were analyzed using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method, identifying the potential variability resulting from the conflicting strategies carried out and the consequences to the capacity of the Brazilian health system to respond to the pandemic.Results of the study show that some government authorities introduced functions that overlapped the operation of the overall system as recommended by health authorities, causing the health system to operate under conflicting objectives, in which functions were created to restrict the outcomes of each other during the entire COVID-19 crisis.

BackgroundResearch on practical and effective governance of the health workforce is limited. This paper examines health system strengthening as it occurs in the intersection between the health workforce and governance by presenting a framework to examine health workforce issues related to eight governance principles: strategic vision, accountability, transparency, information, efficiency, equity/fairness, responsiveness and citizen voice and participation.MethodsThis study builds off of a literature review that informed the development of a framework that describes linkages and assigns indicators between governance and the health workforce. A qualitative analysis of Health System Assessment (HSA) data, a rapid indicator-based methodology that determines the key strengths and weaknesses of a health system using a set of internationally recognized indicators, was completed to determine how 20 low- and middle-income countries are operationalizing health governance to improve health workforce performance.Results/discussionThe 20 countries assessed showed mixed progress in implementing the eight governance principles. Strengths highlighted include increasing the transparency of financial flows from sources to providers by implementing and institutionalizing the National Health Accounts methodology; increasing responsiveness to population health needs by training new cadres of health workers to address shortages and deliver care to remote and rural populations; having structures in place to register and provide licensure to medical professionals upon entry into the public sector; and implementing pilot programs that apply financial and non-financial incentives as a means to increase efficiency. Common weaknesses emerging in the HSAs include difficulties with developing, implementing and evaluating health workforce policies that outline a strategic vision for the health workforce; implementing continuous licensure and regulation systems to hold health workers accountable after they enter the workforce; and making use of health information systems to acquire data from providers and deliver it to policymakers.ConclusionsThe breadth of challenges facing the health workforce requires strengthening health governance as well as human resource systems in order to effect change in the health system. Further research into the effectiveness of specific interventions that enhance the link between the health workforce and governance are warranted to determine approaches to strengthening the health system.

Organ donation and transplantation in Central America.

BackgroundIn Nigeria, several challenges have been reported within the health sector, especially in training, funding, employment, and deployment of the health workforce. We aimed to review recent health workforce crises in the Nigerian health sector to identify key underlying causes and provide recommendations toward preventing and/or managing potential future crises in Nigeria.MethodsWe conducted a scoping literature search of PubMed to identify studies on health workforce and health governance in Nigeria. A critical analysis, with extended commentary, on recent health workforce crises (2010–2016) and the health system in Nigeria was conducted.ResultsThe Nigerian health system is relatively weak, and there is yet a coordinated response across the country. A number of health workforce crises have been reported in recent times due to several months’ salaries owed, poor welfare, lack of appropriate health facilities and emerging factions among health workers. Poor administration and response across different levels of government have played contributory roles to further internal crises among health workers, with different factions engaged in protracted supremacy challenge. These crises have consequently prevented optimal healthcare delivery to the Nigerian population.ConclusionsAn encompassing stakeholders’ forum in the Nigerian health sector remain essential. The national health system needs a solid administrative policy foundation that allows coordination of priorities and partnerships in the health workforce and among various stakeholders. It is hoped that this paper may prompt relevant reforms in health workforce and governance in Nigeria toward better health service delivery in the country.

BackgroundThe government is normally the leading actor in health system governance, yet in some conflict-affected contexts, government or equivalent health authorities are not formally recognised by the international partners who co-finance the health system. This study considers what has inhibited or facilitated cooperation between two types of non-recognised health authorities and international partners in Afghanistan from 2021 to 24 and Northwest Syria from 2013 to 19.MethodsA literature review was combined with 14 semi-structured key informant interviews, mostly with representatives (often health advisers) of donors or UN agencies. A political economy analysis (PEA) analytical framework was used, focusing on the capacities, incentives, beliefs, institutional and structural factors that influenced the behaviour of the key health system actors.ResultsAlthough widely cited as a critical barrier, the lack of formal recognition was not the main constraint on cooperation. The in/stability of the conflict context, the likelihood of survival of de facto health authorities, the extent to which there were clashing norms between actors, and the incentives and ‘ways of doing things’ of both unrecognised authorities and international actors also played key roles. For example, in Afghanistan, the Taliban’s approach to women’s rights and education was identified as the major barrier to cooperation. In Northwest Syria, on the other hand, establishing health governance bodies that were strongly technical in focus and claimed functional independence from sanctioned ruling militias significantly boosted cooperation and protected the health system. Most interviewees felt there was more room for international actors to work with unrecognised health authorities within the “red lines” of international law and organisational mandates, using promising entry points such as supporting Human Resources for Health. There was significant agreement between authorities and international partners on the core health system strategies and priorities in these contexts. But health authorities wanted – and aid cuts suggested they should take – more control over financing and management, and they were naturally more focused than international actors on the holistic needs of the health system, beyond ‘emergency’ assistance.ConclusionsInternational partners and de facto authorities can both take action to use more of the operational space for cooperation.

Depression in post-communist Romania

Depression in post-communist Romania

Governance Issues in Health Financing

BackgroundThe adoption of high-quality health apps has been slow, despite the myriad benefits associated with their use. This is partly due to concerns regarding the effectiveness, safety, and data privacy of such apps. Quality assessments with robust and transparent criteria can address these concerns and, thereby, encourage the use of high-quality apps. However, a major challenge for such assessments is reaching a scale at which a substantial proportion of the more than 350,000 available health apps can be evaluated.ObjectiveTo support the scaling of health app quality assessments, this study aimed to examine the preferences and willingness to pay for assessments with different value propositions among potential customers.MethodsWe conducted 2 discrete choice experiments: one with 41 health app developers and another with 46 health system representatives (from health care institutions, authorities, and insurers) from across Europe. Mixed logit models were applied to examine the impact of assessment attributes on participants’ choices as well as to calculate marginal willingness to pay and predicted assessment uptake.ResultsAmong health app developers, the attributes with the largest impact on assessment choices were the associated clinical care uptake (integration into clinical guidelines and reimbursement or procurement) and cost (purchase price). Increased willingness to use assessed apps and app store integration of assessment results had a moderate impact on choices, while required developer time investment and time until assessment results become available made the smallest contribution. Among health system representatives, increased willingness of clinicians and patients to use evaluated apps had the greatest impact on assessment choices, followed by cost. Time until assessment result availability and the percentage of peers recommending the assessment made a moderate contribution, while reassessment frequency had the smallest impact on choices. On average, health app developers were willing to pay an additional €9020 (95% CI €4968-€13,072) if an assessment facilitates guideline integration and procurement or reimbursement (at the time of data collection, €1=US $1.11), while health system representatives were, on average, willing to pay €7037 (95% CI €4267-€9806) more if an assessment results in a large, rather than a small, increase in willingness to use the evaluated app. The predicted uptake of assessments that offer the preferred values for all attributes was 88.6% among app developers and 91.1% among health system representatives.ConclusionsThese findings indicate that, to maximize uptake and willingness to pay among health app developers, it is advisable for assessments to facilitate or enable clinical guideline integration and reimbursement or procurement for high-scoring apps. Assessment scaling thus requires close collaboration with health authorities, health care institutions, and insurers. Furthermore, if health system organizations are targeted as customers, it is essential to provide evidence for the assessment’s impact on patients’ and clinicians’ willingness to use health apps.

Health 2020: WHO's missing link?

Risk perception of COVID-19 among Portuguese healthcare professionals and the general population

One Health is an important approach to addressing health threats and promoting health through interdisciplinary health, policy, legislation and leadership research to achieve better human and animal health and better outcomes for the planet. The Covid-19 pandemic has triggered an urgent awareness of the need to develop innovative integrative solutions to address root causes of such threats to health, which requires collaboration across disciplines and amongst different sectors and communities. We explore how achieving the Quadripartite Organizations’ One Health Joint Plan of Action can be supported by the concepts of ‘One Health literacy’ and ‘One Health governance’ and promote both academic and policy dialogue. We show how One Health literacy and One Health governance influence and reinforce each other, while an interdisciplinary systems leadership approach acts as a catalyst and mechanism for understanding and enacting change. Based on our understanding of how these elements influence the implementation of the One Health approach, we describe a model for considering how external triggering events such as the Covid-19 pandemic may prompt a virtuous circle whereby exposure to and exploration of One Health issues may lead to improved One Health literacy and to better governance. We close with recommendations to international organisations, national governments and to leaders in policy, research and practice to enhance their influence on society, the planetary environment, health and well-being.