Health System Response Research Articles

The HEROES (HEalth woRkfOrcE to meet health challengeS) Joint Action

Abstract Background The HEROES (HEalth woRkfOrcE to meet health challengeS) Joint Action aims to advance health workforce planning across the EU, addressing the pressing need for a resilient, sustainable, and accessible health service systems. Given the evident strain on health systems demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic, this initiative seeks to address the critical need for strategic HWF planning. Building on previous projects, HEROES will foster the capacity of EU states in workforce planning, preparing the health systems to meet future challenges. Methods The study adopts a collaborative framework involving 19 EU countries, segmented into clusters based on health system characteristics. A stepwise approach (‘AS IS,’ ‘TO BE,’ ‘TO DO’) characterizes the methodology, incorporating extensive data collection, stakeholder engagement, and scenario forecasting. Country-level information on HWF Data and Planning will be compared both across countries in clusters and across clusters. Results Initial findings indicate significant disparities in health workforce data quality, availability, and planning methodologies among the states. Identified methodologies also involve real-world data applications and predictive analytics to refine health workforce planning. Efforts are underway to define an Advanced Minimum Dataset (AMDS) to synchronize health workforce data and define planning tools across the clusters, as country-level AS IS reports have been finalized and cross-country comparisons are ongoing. Conclusions Collaborative, data-driven health workforce planning can significantly enhance health system resilience and responsiveness. Recommended public health actions include enhancing HWF data integration, forecasting capabilities, and stakeholder participation, with the aim of shaping national health policies and practices. The public health impact is profound, as it allows to improve health service delivery and workforce adaptability in response to dynamic health demands. Key messages • The HEROES Joint Action advances EU health workforce planning, with the aim of enhancing the resilience and responsiveness of health systems. • Strategic data-driven approaches in health workforce planning are pivotal for resilient, accessible and sustainable healthcare systems.

10.H. Round table: Transforming health systems in Europe to respond to the large-scale displacement from war in Ukraine

Abstract The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 caused one of the largest population displacements in Europe since World War II. More than 6 million persons have sought international protection in other European countries, distributed in ways that take little account of the host countries’ population size, national income, or health system capacity. This workshop provides a platform to present and discuss findings of a health system impact assessment designed to anticipate the range of mid- to long-term impacts of this large-scale displacement on essential health system functions in refugee-receiving countries, identifying the challenges they face and opportunities to develop transformative policies and actions. This task is urgent given the risks of wider conflict in Europe. Objectives The workshop will 1) present the main findings from the health system impact assessment in seven refugee-receiving countries, 2) set out options for effective responses, considering policy and implementation perspectives, and 3) capitalise on the expertise of workshop participants to develop and refine policy options for structural reforms that not only help to sustain an effective response, but enhance the resilience of European health systems for the benefit of displaced populations and national residents alike. Format The workshop will comprise a panel with three speakers, followed by a roundtable discussion. Each panel member will make a short presentation (5 min) on different, but interrelated aspects of a transformative health system response to a protracted crisis scenario. These will highlight country and regional-level challenges arising during the Ukraine crisis, propose concrete policy options for transformation, and identify intersections between the health system response with other societal sectors and crises. The workshop objectives and rationales will be introduced by Kayvan Bozorgmehr, including a short pitch-presentation (3 min) highlighting the unequal distribution of displaced persons from Ukraine and the key-findings of the health system impact assessment. The panel will include follow-up presentations elaborating specific aspects in this context: 1. Healthcare models and needs for transformative response in a protracted crisis (Dr. Nino Berdzuli, WHO Special Envoy for Ukraine Emergency Response in refugee-receiving countries); 2. Supra-national health financing as transformative reform: pros and cons (Eilin Rast, Bielefeld University, Germany); 3. Regional Geopolitical Conflicts and Population Health in Caucasus, CIS and Ukraine (Prof. Akaki Zoidze, Ilia State University, Georgia). The subsequent roundtable discussion will be chaired by Martin McKee. It will focus on the proposed actions and considerations from a policy and implementation perspective, and workshop participants will be invited to contribute to a critical reflection regarding barriers and enablers, as well as required alliances and processes to translate the structural reforms into practice. Key messages • The ongoing conflict-related displacements from Ukraine have created a protracted crisis that will require structural transformations to enhance health system resilience. • Enhancing healthcare delivery, continuity of care, and effective health financing requires national and supra-national collaboration to sustain effective responses and prepare for future crises. Speakers/Panelists Nino Berdzuli Division of Country Health Programmes, WHO/Europe, Denmark Eilin Rast Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany Akaki Zoidze Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia

The WHO health system performance assessment applied to child healthcare in Luxembourg, 2011-2022

Abstract Background Health System Performance Assessments (HSPAs) evaluate health systems in terms of their objectives and their overall goals, such as access to quality services and health improvement. Beyond the overall health system assessment, HSPA can evaluate performance in providing care to specific populations. We assessed the response of the Luxembourg health system to children’s particular health needs, by populating the WHO HSPA framework for universal healthcare with child-specific indicators. Methods We searched international databases, guidelines, policy documents, and the scientific literature to identify child-specific indicators suitable for assessing the health system objectives as defined by the WHO HSPA framework. To select the most relevant indicators, we conducted expert appraisal regarding feasibility, validity and actionability. Those indicators were calculated based on available national data. To explore inequities within the system, we performed socioeconomic stratifications. Results Twenty-nine indicators were used to populate the framework, sourced from social security databases (n = 15), monitoring and surveillance (n = 11), and surveys (n = 2). For effectiveness assessment, we used 11 indicators and found that preventive services performed best for children under two years. Five indicators showed good accessibility to primary and secondary care. Another five indicators assessed safety indicating a recent increase in the relative use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials and an overuse of caesarean sections. Additional disaggregation of three indicators didn’t expose socioeconomic inequities in service delivery. Data gaps exist to assess children’s user-experience and financing of child health services. Conclusions The WHO HSPA framework proved valuable for evaluating the Luxembourg health system’s performance for children. We identified good performance in accessibility and effectiveness for young children, alongside data gaps to assess user-experience. Key messages • The application of national child-specific indicators to the WHO health system performance assessment, highlighted strengths in accessibility and effectiveness while also pointing to key data gaps. • We used the WHO health system performance assessment (HSPA) to evaluate the health system for children in Luxembourg. This exercise enhances the development of a tailored national HSPA framework.

Co-producing evidence to inform universal health coverage implementation in Ireland: 2019-2024

Abstract Background In 2017, Ireland’s parliamentary health committee published a ten-year health reform plan, entitled Sláintecare, with the aim of delivering universal healthcare. Endorsed by government in 2018, progressing Sláintecare remains government policy in 2024. In 2019, Prof Burke was awarded public funding to co-produce knowledge for the design and implementation of the regions, a key aspect of Sláintecare. In 2020, with the arrival of COVID-19, regional reform was paused and the research pivoted to capture the learning from the COVID-19 health system response to inform Sláintecare. In 2022/3, the research returned to focus on the regions. Methods Foundations’ research resulted in 14 peer-reviewed publications between 2019 and 2023. These were mixed-methods using qualitative and quantitative data and analysis. Coproduction with health system leaders that were devising and implementing the regions and the COVID-19 health system response underpinned the research. Results There are 14 academic publications from the Foundations Research (2019-2023). At the core of co-production is trust and good working relationships. Co-producing research with senior policy makers and implementers has benefits and drawbacks. The benefits include access to resources and data and that the data and knowledge generated are more likely to be adopted. Drawbacks include control over areas researched, denial of access to data and lack of openness to research findings. Producing controversial findings, unpopular with government, minister or health system leaders can also lead to difficulties for the research team. Discussion/conclusions Details of the coproduction process with senior health system and policy leaders will be presented. It will detail specific examples of the research which were initiated by the health system and those that came from the academic research team. It will give examples of how the research influenced the policy making and implementation processes. Key messages • Co-producing research between academics and health system and policy leaders leads to better use of evidence. • Trust and good workign relationships are key to co-producing research that is used in policy making and implementation processes.

1.X.1. Achieving universal health coverage: international lessons from Irish policy implementation

Abstract Health systems all over the world are struggling to meet population health needs and provide timely access to universal healthcare in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 occurred in Ireland in the early years of implementation of a national plan for universal healthcare, called Sláintecare. While many health systems are experiencing a retrenchment on universalism in the context of COVID-19, in Ireland despite tediously slow Sláintecare implementation, the pandemic provided a boost to reform implementation and universalism. The reason for this workshop is to draw on a publicly funded Health Research Board Applied Partnership Award, entitled ‘Foundations’, harnessing lessons from the Irish COVID-19 health system response to inform Sláintecare’s implementation https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/3-70/v1 The objectives of the workshop are to 1) provide academic research evidence from the Irish experience of universal health system reform during and since COVID-19; 2) to give participants space to reflect on the implications of the Irish universal health system reform on international health systems and policy; 3) to actively involve workshop participants in an engaged discussion on implementing universal health coverage in the context of COVID-19. The added value of the workshop is to share learnings from an academic research programme, which is coproducing evidence in partnership with the Irish health system, in a worldwide context, providing relevant and thought-provoking discussion and analysis for an international audience. Four separate inter-related presentations will draw on aspects of the Foundations’ research project. Presentation 1, Prof Sara Burke will outline recent academic literature on universalism and the politics of reform implementation in the context of COVID-19 and present a timeline of universal healthcare reform implementation since 2018 when Sláintecare was adopted by the Irish government (14 mins). Presentation 2, Dr Sarah Parker will detail a specific study which set out to advance understanding of how and to what extent COVID-19 has highlighted opportunities for change that enabled better access to universal, integrated care in Ireland, with a view to informing universal health system reform and implementation (10 mins). Presentation 3, Dr Katharine Schulmann and Carlos Bruen will present findings on the governance of reform implementation and implications for all health systems (10 mins). Presentation 4, Dr Philip Crowley, Health Service Executive (HSE) National Director of Strategy and Research and Chair of the Foundations’ research steering group will reflect how research findings can inform implementing reform and their implications for all health systems (6 mins). There will be four presentations totalling 40 mins, followed by questions and discussion chaired by an international expert/academic on universal health systems. Key messages • COVID-10 has highlighted how universal health coverage is more important than ever, however the pandemic has resulted in some retrenchment on universalism. • While data and research drove health system decision making during the pandemic, embedding research evidence into health system and policy reform remains challenging and can be politically opposed.

The politics of universal health system reform in the context of COVID-19

Abstract Background Implementing universalism is more a political than a technical project. With this in mind, Ireland devised a ten-year plan through political consensus to deliver universal healthcare - Sláintecare. The COVID-19 pandemic occurred early in its implementation. Methods This is qualitative research drawing on international literature on universal health system reform in the context of COVID-19 as well as the politics of health reform. The overall research programme is co-produced with the Irish health system. A timeline and analysis of the reform journey is drawn from documentary analysis of key policy documents, parliamentary reports and key informant interviews. Results Despite a policy commitment since 2005, universal healthcare implementation only became government policy in Ireland 2018. While whole system reform and implementation progress has been slow, the COVID-19 health system response boosted aspects of universalism and reform. All COVID-related services during the pandemic were universal, free at the point of delivery, as are most new services introduced since 2021. Despite the political consensus holding through a change government and the pandemic, and significant additional investment in the public health system, there remain many obstacles to reform. These include different stakeholder understanding of implementing universalism in Ireland especially in the context of COVID-19, how best to implement universal healthcare and the politics of delivering reform. Conclusions Contrary to other countries’ experience during COVID, Ireland pursued its policy aim of delivering universalism and expanded services provided universally, free at the point of delivery, with a focus on enhanced community care. The universalism applied to COVID-related prevention and care, new women’s health and chronic disease management services. Despite progress, government has yet to legislate for a universal entitlement to care and obstacles to reform implementation remain.

Healthcare access for people with disabilities: a scoping review of COVID-19 policies in Europe

Abstract Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic raised healthcare inequalities, affecting the most vulnerable groups. There is limited evidence of whether the COVID-19 measures and the health system’s preparedness for outbreaks among European countries were sufficient to cover the health access needs of PWDs. Aim To provide a structured overview of the COVID-19 measures and policies addressing access to primary and specialist health services for PWDs during the COVID-19 pandemic in the European Members States (MS) and the United Kingdom (UK), using ten dimensions of healthcare access by Levesque et al. (2013) and the PoliMap taxonomy. Methods This study followed the PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews. A search strategy was employed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from January 2020 to January 2023. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals in English, Portuguese, and Spanish were included, informing a COVID-19 measure or policy and assessing or providing a rationale with access to primary or special healthcare services. Results The final search strategy yielded 2.076 results, 188 studies were reviewed for full-text analysis, and 74 were included in the final analysis. One hundred twenty-one policies or measures addressing primary or specialist care access were identified. Only thirteen target PWDs, focussing on intellectual or mental disability and addressing mental healthcare services. Results revealed that COVID-19 measures for PWDs were oriented to increase health system response capacity and reduce virus transmission, describing a predominantly negative effect on healthcare access for PWDs. Conclusions The needs of PWDs in access to primary and specialist care were not fully covered by the policies and measures placed during the COVID-19 pandemic among the MS and the UK. One-size approaches focussing on the attendance of COVID-19 infection with stigmatizing measures overlook the specific health necessities of this population. Key messages • Adopting disabled-inclusive measures in the daily healthcare provision and engaging PWDs in the policy cycle is paramount to preparing for the next outbreak and public health crises. • Additional research focusing on primary and specialized healthcare access during outbreaks for PWDs, especially with sensory and physical disabilities, is crucial to furthering health equity.

Key stakeholders’ perspectives of public health emergency preparedness in Palestine: A qualitative exploratory study

ObjectivesPalestine continues to face emergencies and a series of humanitarian crises. This study aims to comprehend emergency planning and response including the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Comprehending and recording these experiences will facilitate on-going improvement of Palestine's Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP). Study designA qualitative exploratory study. MethodsFifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informant decision-makers representing various sectors of the Palestinian health system. The data collection period took place from April 2022–December 2022. A convenient purposive sample was chosen based on identifying important stakeholders in the West Bank's health sector. Every interview was transcribed. Major themes and subthemes were identified using content thematic analysis. ResultsThe study demonstrates Palestine's inadequate preparation for emergencies, instead there is a focus on response once a crisis has occurred. No national entity or mechanism is leading the collective preparedness efforts, which might ultimately result in a stronger emergency response. Instead, the efforts are dispersed across several entities, and decisions are not made cooperatively. As for resources, the study indicates that an emergency budget has not been allocated. The study showed a good degree of multi-sectoral collaboration with some reservations regarding the creation of various committees and their efficacy in handling crises. ConclusionThe findings made it abundantly evident that significant efforts are needed to improve Palestine's level of preparedness and planning. One of the study's primary conclusions is that the health sector must shift from a reactionary to a preparedness-oriented mindset. Additionally, it is necessary to keep an eye on any changes in the nation's health and analysis must take place to strengthen the health system's response plans. Moreover, the activation of the emergency operation center in Palestine is one of the key advancements of the preparedness system.

Power, data and social accountability: defining a community-led monitoring model for strengthened health service delivery.

Despite international commitment to achieving the end of HIV as a public health threat, progress is off-track and existing gaps have been exacerbated by COVID-19's collision with existing pandemics. Born out of models of political accountability and historical healthcare advocacy led by people living with HIV, community-led monitoring (CLM) of health service delivery holds potential as a social accountability model to increase the accessibility and quality of health systems. However, the effectiveness of the CLM model in strengthening accountability and improving service delivery relies on its alignment with evidence-based principles for social accountability mechanisms. We propose a set of unifying principles for CLM to support the impact on the quality and availability of health services. Building on the social accountability literature, core CLM implementation principles are defined. CLM programmes include a community-led and independent data collection effort, in which the data tools and methodology are designed by service users and communities most vulnerable to, and most impacted by, service quality. Data are collected routinely, with an emphasis on prioritizing and protecting respondents, and are then be used to conduct routine and community-led advocacy, with the aim of increasing duty-bearer accountability to service users. CLM efforts should represent a broad and collective community response, led independently by impacted communities, incorporating both data collection and advocacy, and should be understood as a long-term approach to building meaningful engagement in systems-wide improvements rather than discrete interventions. The CLM model is an important social accountability mechanism for improving the responsiveness of critical health services and systems to communities. By establishing a collective understanding of CLM principles, this model paves the way for improved proliferation of CLM with fidelity of implementation approaches to core principles, rigorous examinations of CLM implementation approaches, impact assessments and evaluations of CLM's influence on service quality improvement.

Global radiotherapy demands and corresponding radiotherapy-professional workforce requirements in 2022 and predicted to 2050: a population-based study.

Addressing the challenge of cancer control requires a comprehensive, integrated, and global health-system response. We aimed to estimate global radiotherapy demands and requirements for radiotherapy professionals from 2022 to 2050. We conducted a population-based study using data from the Global Cancer Observatory (GLOBOCAN) 2022 and predicted global radiotherapy demands and workforce requirements in 2050. We obtained incidence figures for 29 types of cancer across 183 countries and derived the cancer-specific radiotherapy use rate using the 2013 Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation model. We delineated the proportion of people with cancer who require radiotherapy and can be accommodated within the existing installed capacity, assuming an optimal use rate of 50% or 64%, in both 2022 and 2050. A use rate of 50% corresponds to the global average and a use rate of 64% considers potential re-treatment scenarios, as indicated by the 2013 Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CCORE) radiotherapy use rate model. We established specified requirements for teletherapy units at a ratio of 1:450 patients, for radiation oncologists at a ratio of 1:250 patients, for medical physicists at a ratio of 1:450 patients, and for radiation therapists at a ratio of 1:150 patients in all countries and consistently using these ratios. We collected current country-level data on the radiotherapy-professional workforce from national health reports, oncology societies, or other authorities from 32 countries. In 2022, there were an estimated 20·0 million new cancer diagnoses, with approximately 10·0 million new patients needing radiotherapy at an estimated use rate of 50% and 12·8 million at an estimated use rate of 64%. In 2050, GLOBOCAN 2022 data indicated 33·1 million new cancer diagnoses, with 16·5 million new patients needing radiotherapy at an estimated use rate of 50% and 21·2 million at an estimated use rate of 64%. These findings indicate an absolute increase of 8·4 million individuals requiring radiotherapy from 2022 to 2050 at an estimated use rate of 64%; at an estimated use rate of 50%, the absolute increase would be 6·5 million individuals. Asia was estimated to have the highest radiotherapy demand in 2050 (11 119 478 [52·6%] of 21 161 603 people with cancer), followed by Europe (3 564 316 [16·8%]), North America (2 546 826 [12·0%]), Latin America and the Caribbean (1 837 608 [8·7%]), Africa (1 799 348 [8·5%]), and Oceania (294 026 [1·4%]). We estimated that the global radiotherapy workforce in 2022 needed 51 111 radiation oncologists, 28 395 medical physicists, and 85 184 radiation therapists and 84 646 radiation oncologists, 47 026 medical physicists, and 141 077 radiation therapists in 2050. We estimated that the largest proportion of the radiotherapy workforce in 2050 would be in upper-middle-income countries (101 912 [38·8%] of 262 624 global radiotherapy professionals). Urgent strategies are required to empower the global health-care workforce and facilitate the fundamental human right of access to suitable health care. A collective effort with innovative and cost-contained health-care strategies from all stakeholders is warranted to enhance global accessibility to radiotherapy and address challenges in cancer care. China Medical Board Global Health Leadership Development Program, Shanghai Science and Technology Committee Fund, China Ministry of Science and Technology Department of International Cooperation High Level Cooperation and Exchange Projects, and Fudan University Office of Global Partnerships Key Projects Development Fund. For the Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish translations of the summary see Supplementary Materials section.

Improving mental health response in earthquake-prone regions: recommendations following the recent earthquake in Türkiye

We are members of Students’ Education, Empowerment and Development in Mental Health, a group of medical students and psychiatrists from around the globe under the Psychiatry, Medicine and Primary Care Section of the World Psychiatric Association. In this article, we put forward recommendations to help improve the mental health response in disaster-prone regions such as Türkiye. We recommend a three-step multi-tiered mental health response system that could significantly help to address the immediate, short-term and long-term mental health needs of communities directly affected by a disaster. The recommendation draws from the relevant literature and, most importantly, from our lived experiences of living in earthquake-prone countries.

Innovation bundles and platforms – a qualitative analysis of health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundHealth systems underwent substantial changes to respond to COVID-19. Learning from the successes and failures of health system COVID-19 responses may help us understand how future health service responses can be designed to be both effective and sustainable. This study aims to identify the role that innovation played in crafting health service responses during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted online, exploring 19 health professionals’ experiences in responding to COVID-19 in a large State health system in Australia. The data were collected from April to September 2022 and analysed utilising constant comparative analysis. The degree of innovation in health service responses was assessed by comparing them to pre-pandemic services using 5 categories adopted from the IMPISCO (Investigators, Methods, Population, Intervention, Setting, Comparators and Outcomes) framework, which classifies interventional fidelity as: 1/ Identical: No differences are found between health services; 2/ Substitution with alternatives that perform the same function, 3/ In-class replacement with elements that delivers roughly the same functionality, 4/ Augmentation with new functions, 5/ Creation of new elements. Services were decomposed into bundles and fidelity labels were assigned to individual bundle elements.ResultsNew services were typically created by reconfiguring existing ones rather than being created de novo. The presence of pre-existing infrastructure (foundational technologies) was seen as critical in mounting fast health service responses. Absence of infrastructure was associated with delays and impaired system responses.ConclusionsThe need to reconfigure rapidly and use infrastructure to support this suggests we reconceive health services as a platform (a general-purpose service upon which other elements can be added for specific functions), where a common core service (such as a primary care practice) can be extended by adding specialised functions using mediators which facilitate the connection (such as virtual service capabilities). Innovation can be costly and time consuming in crises, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, innovations were typically patched together from pre-existing services. The notion of platforms seems a promising way to prepare the health system for future shocks.

Burden of Illness Associated With Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Influenza, and Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Infants and Young Children in Ontario, Canada, 2018-2023: A Population-Based Canadian Immunization Research Network Study.

As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transitions to endemicity and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza reestablish their seasonal circulation patterns, understanding their comparative burden on infants and children can guide health system responses and funding priorities. This was a population-based cohort study of children aged <5 years in Ontario, Canada, from September 2018 to August 2023 using linked health administrative databases. Seasonal cohorts comprised 731 838 to 763 660 children. RSV- and influenza-related hospital admission rates immediately decreased in March 2020. In 2021-2022, RSV-related admissions rebounded but remained 8%-11% lower than prepandemic seasons, whereas 2022-2023 RSV-related admissions increased 105%-113% versus prepandemic seasons and peak admissions occurred in November versus December. Influenza did not rebound until 2022-2023, when admissions were 28%-37% higher than prepandemic seasons. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related admissions remained low until 2021-2022 and were lower than RSV-related admissions across all age groups during prepandemic and pandemic seasons. By contrast, 2021-2022 COVID-19-related admissions exceeded prepandemic influenza-related admissions by 30%-40% but decreased by 45% in 2022-2023 and were lower than prepandemic influenza-related admissions, except among infants aged <12 months who remained at highest risk. There was no distinct seasonal pattern for COVID-19-related admissions during the study. RSV remains a major cause of childhood hospitalization. Although COVID-19 appears to be receding, its disease burden as it transitions to endemicity remains to be established. The unprecedented peaks in RSV-related hospital admissions during 2022-2023, together with the return of influenza and ongoing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, underscore the need to strengthen systems for real-time surveillance and to proactively prepare for critical healthcare scenarios.

Health system interventions and responses to anti-microbial resistance: A scoping review of evidence from 15 African countries.

The global rise in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is claiming the lives of more than 1.2 million people each year. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) this global health crisis is particularly acute in Africa, largely due to fragile and underfunded health systems. Efforts to combat this public health threat have led to the implementation of health system interventions worldwide aimed at managing and containing the spread of AMR. However, the literature on the real time impacts and the barriers that hinder the implementation of these interventions in the African context is limited. The objective of this scoping review was to identify AMR interventions in African health systems, their impact, and the challenges of the implementation. Drawing on Muka and colleague's 24 step approach for scoping reviews, two major public health databases (PubMed and Global Health) were searched for articles in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines resulting in 4,783 records. Screening and retrieval of articles was done using Rayyan software based on specified inclusion criteria and 36 articles included in the final list. These articles were synthesized after extracting specific data on AMR interventions and their impact on African health systems. The review identified four broad impacts of AMR interventions including 1. Reduction in antibiotics use, 2. Increased adherence to guidelines and protocols, 3. Enhanced laboratory-based AMR surveillance, 4. Development of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) Action Plans and Teams. However, challenges such as poor laboratory infrastructure, logistical challenges, poor financial commitment and inadequate education and training were identified as challenges impeding the successful implementation of AMR interventions in Africa. Our findings reveal a range of successful AMR interventions in African health systems although infrastructural and financial challenges remain. Better standardization and reporting of AMR diagnosis while leveraging the available information is needed to improve the optimization of treatment guidelines across Africa.

Short-term health system responses to epidemics across hard to reach areas in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review protocol.

Epidemics and Pandemics (disease outbreaks) are the occurrence of cases of disease in excess of what would be normally expected. Epidemic-prone diseases, including emerging and re-emerging diseases, constitute the greatest threat to public health security and disruption of social and economic development. When outbreaks are diagnosed in specific areas, an outbreak response is triggered to stop the spread rapidly. In the past 20 years, the sub-Saharan region has witnessed a marked increase in the number of outbreaks in pandemics, such as cholera, dengue, A/H5N 1 influenza among others. While efforts toward containment have been individually studied, we have no recent studies that examine them collectively in order to draw appropriate comparisons, no recent studies that have especially focused on hard-to-reach areas, and none that have applied a health systems lens. This study thus details a scoping review of short-term health system responses to epidemics across hard-to-reach areas in sub-Saharan Africa. The scoping review will be undertaken following PRISMA guidelines. A modified Donabedian framework will be used to understand the different approaches used while responding to epidemics. The review will focus on published and unpublished studies that report short-term health systems responses to epidemics in hard to reach areas. These will be gleaned from PubMed, google scholar and Cochrane, supplemented by a Google advanced search. In addition, manual searches will be carried out through related articles and websites. Data will be charted, coded, and narratively synthesized. our exclusion criteria will include; protocols, book chapters and countries not identified as hard to reach areas in SSA. We anticipate developing a document that will show the different approaches health systems in different countries used when responding to epidemics. The information generated will contribute to strengthening future epidemic responses by identifying best practices and innovative ideas as well as highlighting knowledge gaps.

COVID-19 research response to immediate demands: setting priorities with key stakeholders to enable health services research in NSW, Australia

PurposeCOVID-19 has caused unprecedented disruption to health systems. There is much to be gained by capturing what was learned from changes and adaptations made by health services and systems. The Ministry of Health in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, sought to prioritise health services research (HSR) to address critical issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. We tested a priority setting methodology to create priorities for a specific funding opportunity and to extract generalisable lessons.Design/methodology/approachA virtual roundtable meeting of key stakeholders was held in June 2020. We used a modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT) for priority setting, with potential items (n = 35) grouped under headings. Data was analysed through a reflective deliberative process.FindingsWe engaged 89 senior policy makers, health service executives, clinicians and researchers in the roundtable. The NGT proved an efficient method with participants reaching consensus on eight priorities. Findings included strong support for learning from the rapid response to COVID-19 and addressing needs of vulnerable populations and the health workforce. Opinions differed about strategic areas investment and where learnings should be via internal evaluation rather than funded research. Three of the eight recommended priorities were included in the funding opportunity.Research limitations/implicationsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) required unprecedented change and adaptations within health systems, and rapid, applied health services research can help to create, understand and (where relevant) sustain change beyond the immediate impact of the pandemic. While final decisions may be dependent on a wider range of considerations by government, stakeholder enthusiasm for engagement in priority setting exercises may be dampened if they do not perceive their application in decision-making.Practical implicationsA modified nominal group technique can be used to set research priorities in constrained conditions by engaging large numbers of stakeholders in rankings and then using an online delivery of a roundtable and to reach consensus on priorities in real time. Recommended priorities for health services research can be readily generated through rapid engagement but does not guarantee their application.Social implicationsAustralia’s swift response to COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 was perceived as a relative success due to the rapid public health and policy response and a relatively low number of cases. This response was underpinned by systematic knowledge mobilisation including support for targeted and prioritised health services research to fill knowledge gaps.Originality/valueSetting priority processes can provide rich, engaged input to support government funding decisions about HSR. A wide range of dynamic and iterative processes influence decision-making in a rapidly evolving situation in the health system response to COVID-19. It is crucial to consider how major investment decisions will support a value-based healthcare system.

Tracking aspects of healthcare activity during the first nine months of COVID-19 in Ireland: a secondary analysis of publicly available data.

Sláintecare aims to introduce universal healthcare in Ireland. The COVID-19 pandemic poses both challenges and opportunities to this process. This study explored the impact of COVID-19 on aspects of Irish healthcare during the first nine months of the pandemic and considers the implications for Sláintecare implementation. Secondary analysis was undertaken on publicly available data on three key domains of the Irish healthcare system: primary care, community-based allied healthcare, and hospitals. Descriptive statistics were computed using Microsoft Excel 2016. Up to March 2021, 3.76 million COVID-19 tests were performed by Ireland's public healthcare system, 2.48 million (66.0%) of which were referred from the community. General practitioners delivered 2.31 million telephone triages of COVID-19 symptoms, peaking in December 2020 when 416,607 consultations occurred. Patient numbers across eight allied healthcare specialties fell by 35.1% versus previous years, with the greatest reductions seen in speech and language therapy (49.0%) and audiology (46.1%). Hospital waiting lists increased from 729,937 to 869,676 (or by 19.1%) from January 2019 to January 2021. In January 2021, 629,919 patients awaited a first outpatient clinic appointment, with 170,983 (27.1%) waiting longer than 18 months. The largest outpatient lists were observed in orthopaedic surgery (n=77,257); ear, nose and throat surgery (n=68,073); and ophthalmology (n=47,075). The proportion of patients waiting more than 12 months for a day-case gastrointestinal endoscopy rose from 6.0% in January 2020 to 19.0% in January 2021. Healthcare activity has been significantly disrupted by COVID-19, leading to increased wait times and greater barriers to healthcare access during the pandemic. Yet, Ireland's health system responses also revealed strong willingness and ability to adapt and to implement novel solutions for healthcare delivery, rapidly and at scale. This has demonstrated what is achievable under Sláintecare and provides a unique opportunity to 'build back better' towards sustainable recovery.

A qualitative analysis of health service problems and the strategies used to manage them in the COVID-19 pandemic: exploiting generic and context-specific approaches

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic disrupted health systems around the globe. Lessons from health systems responses to these challenges may help design effective and sustainable health system responses for future challenges. This study aimed to 1/ identify the broad types of health system challenges faced during the pandemic and 2/ develop a typology of health system response to these challenges.MethodsSemi-structured one-on-one online interviews explored the experience of 19 health professionals during COVID-19 in a large state health system in Australia. Data were analysed using constant comparative analysis utilising a sociotechnical system lens.ResultsParticipants described four overarching challenges: 1/ System overload, 2/ Barriers to decision-making, 3/ Education or training gaps, and 4/ Limitations of existing services. The limited time often available to respond meant that specific and well-designed strategies were often not possible, and more generic strategies that relied on the workforce to modify solutions and repair unexpected gaps were common. For example, generic responses to system overload included working longer hours, whilst specific strategies utilised pre-existing technical resources (e.g. converting non-emergency wards into COVID-19 wards).ConclusionDuring the pandemic, it was often not possible to rely on mature strategies to frame responses, and more generic, emergent approaches were commonly required when urgent responses were needed. The degree to which specific strategies were ready-to-hand appeared to dictate how much a strategy relied on such generic approaches. The workforce played a pivotal role in enabling emergent responses that required dealing with uncertainties.

Beyond resilience? A comparative sociological analysis of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on five European health care systems

Background The article questions the popularity of resilience as a concept and its application to health care systems as a main lens for understanding the impact the COVID-19 pandemic on them. Methods It develops a sociological definition following a thorough examination of the various proposed meanings for the term. Subsequently, it proposes a conceptual framework to analyze the vulnerability and sustainability of health care systems as a more comprehensive tool that moves beyond the limitations of resilience. This framework is then applied to evaluate its heuristic value in assessing the resilience strategies adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in five European countries (France, Hungary, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom), considered as problematic ‘sentinel cases’ within their health macro-regions. Adopting the six variables provided by the COVID-19 Health Systems Response Monitor of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, a detailed comparative analysis is conducted. This analysis explores the resilience strategies of these countries in terms of the vulnerability outputs they produced and their consequent effects on the sustainability of their health care systems. Results The results show that the resilience strategies adopted during the pandemic were shaped by the different configurations of health care systems and policy decisions regarding resource mobilization. As such, these strategies produced various vulnerability outputs, resulting in different degrees of risk distribution and sustainability. Conclusions These results are pertinent for understanding that what matters from a sociological point of view is not simply how different health care systems cope with external shocks like a pandemic to retain control over their structure and functions (resilience), but the social consequences produced by their strategies.

'The Lost Peace': Evidencing the Syndemic Relationship between Neglected Tropical Diseases and Mental Distress in Liberia.

Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) are a group of chronic infectious diseases of poverty affecting over one billion people globally. Intersections of NTDs, disability, and mental ill-health are increasingly evidenced but are rarely studied from a mixed-methods perspective. Here, we advance syndemic understandings by further assessing and contextualising the syndemic relationship between NTDs (particularly their associated disability) and mental distress in Liberia. Participatory qualitative methods, including body mapping (56 participants), social mapping (28 participants), and in-depth interviews (12) provided space for persons affected by NTDs to narrate their experiences. Simultaneously, 201 surveys explored experiences of common mental health conditions among persons affected by skin NTDs. An intersectionality approach was applied within the analysis for both qualitative and quantitative methods informed by Meyer's minority stress model, adapted for NTDs. Qualitative data was analysed thematically and gender-disaggregated, univariable and multivariable analyses were applied to survey data for the outcome measures depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7). Disability was associated with higher levels of depression and anxiety (p < 0.001). An interaction between disability and being a women increased incidence risk ratio of depression (p < 0.001). In alignment with qualitative findings, persons affected experienced additional generalised (financial concerns), external (experience of stigma) and internal (experience of pain and physical symptoms) minority stressors, to varying degrees, which contributed towards their mental distress, and mental health conditions. These findings were used to co-develop a syndemic-informed person-centred health system response to address the suffering associated with NTDs and mental distress, including a focus on strengthening relationships between formal and informal community health actors and the broader health system.