Successes and challenges of health systems governance towards universal health coverage and global health security: a narrative review and synthesis of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The shift in the global burden of disease from communicable to noncommunicable was a factor in mobilizing support for a broader post-Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) health agenda. To curb these and other global health problems, 193 Member States of the United Nations (UN) became signatories of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and committed to achieving universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030. In the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the importance of health systems governance (HSG) is felt now more than ever for addressing the pandemic and continuing to provide essential health services. However, little is known about the successes and challenges of HSG with respect to UHC and health security. This study, therefore, aims to synthesize the evidence and identify successes and challenges of HSG towards UHC and health security. METHODS: We conducted a structured narrative review of studies published through 28 July 2021. We searched the existing literature using three databases: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Search terms included three themes: HSG, UHC and health security. We synthesized the findings using the five core functions of HSG: policy formulation and strategic plans; intelligence; regulation; collaboration and coalition; and accountability. RESULTS: A total of 58 articles were included in the final review. We identified that context-specific health policy and health financing modalities helped to speed up the progress towards UHC and health security. Robust health intelligence, intersectoral collaboration and coalition were also essential to combat the pandemic and ensure the delivery of essential health services. On the contrary, execution of a one-size-fits-all HSG approach, lack of healthcare funding, corruption, inadequate health workforce, and weak regulatory and health government policies were major challenges to achieving UHC and health security. CONCLUSIONS: Countries, individually and collectively, need strong HSG to speed up the progress towards UHC and health security. Decentralization of health services to grass root levels, support of stakeholders, fair contribution and distribution of resources are essential to support the implementation of programmes towards UHC and health security. It is also vital to ensure independent regulatory accreditation of organizations in the health system and to integrate quality- and equity-related health service indicators into the national social protection monitoring and evaluation system; these will speed up the progress towards UHC and health security.

Knowledge, attitude, and intention to accept COVID-19 vaccine among patients with chronic diseases in southern Ethiopia: Multi-center study

Background Most of the COVID-19 fatal cases and severe illnesses like acute respiratory distress syndrome occur in older adults and other people who have underlying medical comorbidities. Understanding patients with chronic disease' knowledge, attitudes, and intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine and related factors are necessary to control the mortality of COVID-19 infection. Therefore, this study aimed to assess knowledge, attitudes, and intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine among patients with chronic disease in Southern Ethiopia. Methods and materials A facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 409 patients with chronic diseases having a follow-up at the hospitals of the Southern region of Ethiopia from November 14, 2021, to December 24, 2021. A structured, interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression was conducted to show the association of variables with knowledge, attitude, and intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The associations of variables were declared with the use of a 95% CI and P-value < 0.05. Results Overall, 79.2, 70.9, and 58.2% of participants had good knowledge, favorable attitude, and intent to take the COVID-19 vaccine, respectively. Age ≥49 years old (AOR = 1.643;95% CI = 1.008–3.060) and college and above level of education (AOR = 3.002;95% CI = 1.897–5.021) were found to be significantly associated with knowledge about COVID-19 vaccine. College and above level of education (AOR = 1.510;95% CI = 1.002–3.975) and good knowledge (AOR = 3.560;95% CI = 1.481–6.120) were found to be significantly associated with intention to take COVID-19 vaccine. Conclusion and recommendation Intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine was low among patients with chronic diseases to achieve herd immunity. Therefore, a holistic and multi-sectoral partnership is necessary for a successful COVID-19 vaccination campaign. Further health education and communication are very crucial methods to improve vaccine acceptance and lastly to achieve herd immunity.

Universality of universal health coverage: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The progress of Universal health coverage (UHC) is measured using tracer indicators of key interventions, which have been implemented in healthcare system. UHC is about population, comprehensive health services and financial coverage for equitable quality services and health outcome. There is dearth of evidence about the extent of the universality of UHC in terms of types of health services, its integrated definition (dimensions) and tracer indicators utilized in the measurement of UHC. Therefore, we mapped the existing literature to assess universality of UHC and summarize the challenges towards UHC. METHODS: The checklist Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews was used. A systematic search was carried out in the Web of Science and PubMed databases. Hand searches were also conducted to find articles from Google Scholar, the World Bank Library, the World Health Organization Library, the United Nations Digital Library Collections, and Google. Article search date was between 20 October 2021 and 12 November 2021 and the most recent update was done on 03 March 2022. Articles on UHC coverage, financial risk protection, quality of care, and inequity were included. The Population, Concept, and Context framework was used to determine the eligibility of research questions. A stepwise approach was used to identify and select relevant studies, conduct data charting, collation and summarization, as well as report results. Simple descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were used to present the findings. RESULTS: Forty-seven papers were included in the final review. One-fourth of the articles (25.5%) were from the African region and 29.8% were from lower-middle-income countries. More than half of the articles (54.1%) followed a quantitative research approach. Of included articles, coverage was assessed by 53.2% of articles; financial risk protection by 27.7%, inequity by 25.5% and quality by 6.4% of the articles as the main research objectives or mentioned in result section. Most (42.5%) of articles investigated health promotion and 2.1% palliation and rehabilitation services. Policy and healthcare level and cross-cutting barriers of UHC were identified. Financing, leadership/governance, inequity, weak regulation and supervision mechanism, and poverty were most repeated policy level barriers. Poor quality health services and inadequate health workforce were the common barriers from health sector challenges. Lack of common understanding on UHC was frequently mentioned as a cross-cutting barrier. CONCLUSIONS: The review showed that majority of the articles were from the African region. Methodologically, quantitative research design was more frequently used to investigate UHC. Palliation and rehabilitation health care services need attention in the monitoring and evaluation of UHC progress. It is also noteworthy to focus on quality and inequity of health services. The study implies that urgent action on the identified policy, health system and cross-cutting barriers is required to achieve UHC.

Attributes of national governance for an effective response to public health emergencies: Lessons from the response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic takes variable shapes and forms in different regions and countries. This variability is explained by several factors, including the governance of the epidemic. We aimed to identify the key attributes of governance in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and gain lessons for an effective response to public health emergencies. Methods: We employed a mixed-methods design. We mapped the attributes of governance from well-established governance frameworks. A negative binomial regression was conducted to identify the effect of the established governance measures on the epidemiology of the COVID-19 pandemic. We used publicly available data on COVID-19 cases and deaths in countries around the world. Document review was conducted to identify the key approaches and attributes of governance during the pre-vaccine era of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify key attributes for effective governance. Results: The established governance measures, including generation of intelligence, strategic direction, regulation, partnership, accountability, transparency, rule of law, control of corruption, responsiveness, effectiveness, efficiency, equity, ethics, and inclusiveness, are necessary but not sufficient to effectively respond to and contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional attributes of national governance were identified: 1) agile, adaptive, and transformative governance; 2) collective (collaborative, inclusive, cooperative, accountable, and transparent) governance; 3) multi-level governance; 4) smart and ethical governance: sensible, pragmatic, evidence-based, political, learner, and ethical. Conclusions: The current governance frameworks and their attributes are not adequate to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that countries need agile, adaptable, and transformational, collaborative, multi-level, smart and ethical governance to effectively respond to emerging and re-emerging public health threats. In addition, an effective response to public health emergencies depends not only on national governance but also on global governance. Hence, global health governance should be urgently renewed through a paradigm shift towards universal health coverage and health security to all populations and in all countries. This requires enhanced and consistent global health diplomacy based on knowledge, solidarity, and negotiation.

Analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons towards a more effective response to public health emergencies.

BACKGROUND: The pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a timely reminder of the nature and impact of Public Health Emergencies of International Concern. As of 12 January 2022, there were over 314 million cases and over 5.5 million deaths notified since the start of the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic takes variable shapes and forms, in terms of cases and deaths, in different regions and countries of the world. The objective of this study is to analyse the variable expression of COVID-19 pandemic so that lessons can be learned towards an effective public health emergency response. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study to understand the heterogeneity of cases and deaths due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Correlation analysis and scatter plot were employed for the quantitative data. We used Spearman's correlation analysis to determine relationship strength between cases and deaths and socio-economic and health systems. We organized qualitative information from the literature and conducted a thematic analysis to recognize patterns of cases and deaths and explain the findings from the quantitative data. RESULTS: We have found that regions and countries with high human development index have higher cases and deaths per million population due to COVID-19. This is due to international connectedness and mobility of their population related to trade and tourism, and their vulnerability related to older populations and higher rates of non-communicable diseases. We have also identified that the burden of the pandemic is also variable among high- and middle-income countries due to differences in the governance of the pandemic, fragmentation of health systems, and socio-economic inequities. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that every country remains vulnerable to public health emergencies. The aspiration towards a healthier and safer society requires that countries develop and implement a coherent and context-specific national strategy, improve governance of public health emergencies, build the capacity of their (public) health systems, minimize fragmentation, and tackle upstream structural issues, including socio-economic inequities. This is possible through a primary health care approach, which ensures provision of universal and equitable promotive, preventive and curative services, through whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches.

The COVID-19 pandemic and healthcare systems in Africa: a scoping review of preparedness, impact and response.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed health systems in both developed and developing nations alike. Africa has one of the weakest health systems globally, but there is limited evidence on how the region is prepared for, impacted by and responded to the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL to search peer-reviewed articles and Google, Google Scholar and preprint sites for grey literature. The scoping review captured studies on either preparedness or impacts or responses associated with COVID-19 or covering one or more of the three topics and guided by Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework. The extracted information was documented following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension checklist for scoping reviews. Finally, the resulting data were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-two eligible studies, of which 6 reported on health system preparedness, 19 described the impacts of COVID-19 on access to general and essential health services and 7 focused on responses taken by the healthcare systems were included. The main setbacks in health system preparation included lack of available health services needed for the pandemic, inadequate resources and equipment, and limited testing ability and surge capacity for COVID-19. Reduced flow of patients and missing scheduled appointments were among the most common impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health system responses identified in this review included the availability of telephone consultations, re-purposing of available services and establishment of isolation centres, and provisions of COVID-19 guidelines in some settings. CONCLUSIONS: The health systems in Africa were inadequately prepared for the pandemic, and its impact was substantial. Responses were slow and did not match the magnitude of the problem. Interventions that will improve and strengthen health system resilience and financing through local, national and global engagement should be prioritised.

The heterogeneity of the COVID-19 pandemic and national responses: an explanatory mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has quickly spread to all corners of the world since its emergence in Wuhan, China in December of 2019. The disease burden has been heterogeneous across regions of the world, with Americas leading in cumulative cases and deaths, followed by Europe, Southeast Asia, Eastern Mediterranean, Africa and Western Pacific. Initial responses to COVID-19 also varied between governments, ranging from proactive containment to delayed intervention. Understanding these variabilities allow high burden countries to learn from low burden countries on ways to create more sustainable response plans in the future. METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods approach to perform cross-country comparisons of pandemic responses in the United States (US), Brazil, Germany, Australia, South Korea, Thailand, New Zealand, Italy and China. These countries were selected based on their income level, relative COVID-19 burden and geographic location. To rationalize the epidemiological variability, a list of 14 indicators was established to assess the countries' preparedness, actual response, and socioeconomic and demographic profile in the context of COVID-19. RESULTS: As of 1 April 2021, the US had the highest cases per million out of the nine countries, followed by Brazil, Italy, Germany, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and China. Meanwhile, Italy ranked first out of the nine countries' total deaths per million, followed by the US, Brazil, Germany, Australia, South Korea, New Zealand, China and Thailand. The epidemiological differences between these countries could be explained by nine indicators, and they were 1) leadership, governance and coordination of response, 2) communication, 3) community engagement, 4) multisectoral actions, 5) public health capacity, 6) universal health coverage, 7) medical services and hospital capacity, 8) demography and 9) burden of non-communicable diseases. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic manifests varied outcomes due to differences in countries' vulnerability, preparedness and response. Our study rationalizes why South Korea, New Zealand, Thailand, Australia and China performed better than the US, Italy and Brazil. By identifying the strengths of low burden countries and weaknesses of hotspot countries, we elucidate factors constituting an effective pandemic response that can be adopted by leaders in preparation for re-emerging public health threats.

Global health security and universal health coverage: Understanding convergences and divergences for a synergistic response.

BACKGROUND: Global health security (GHS) and universal health coverage (UHC) are key global health agendas which aspire for a healthier and safer world. However, there are tensions between GHS and UHC strategy and implementation. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between GHS and UHC using two recent quantitative indices. METHODS: We conducted a macro-analysis to determine the presence of relationship between GHS index (GHSI) and UHC index (UHCI). We calculated Pearson's correlation coefficient and the coefficient of determination. Analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 25 with a 95% level of confidence. FINDINGS: There is a moderate and significant relationship between GHSI and UHCI (r = 0.662, p<0.001) and individual indices of UHCI (maternal and child health and infectious diseases: r = 0.623 (p<0.001) and 0.594 (p<0.001), respectively). However, there is no relationship between GHSI and the non-communicable diseases (NCDs) index (r = 0.063, p>0.05). The risk of GHS threats a significant and negative correlation with the capacity for GHS (r = -0.604, p<0.001) and the capacity for UHC (r = -0.792, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The aspiration for GHS will not be realized without UHC; hence, the tension between these two global health agendas should be transformed into a synergistic solution. We argue that strengthening the health systems, in tandem with the principles of primary health care, and implementing a "One Health" approach will progressively enable countries to achieve both UHC and GHS towards a healthier and safer world that everyone aspires to live in.

COVID-19: Does the infectious inoculum dose-response relationship contribute to understanding heterogeneity in disease severity and transmission dynamics?

The variation in the speed and intensity of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and severity of the resulting COVID-19 disease are still imperfectly understood. We postulate a dose-response relationship in COVID-19, and that "the dose of virus in the initial inoculum" is an important missing link in understanding several incompletely explained observations in COVID-19 as a factor in transmission dynamics and severity of disease. We hypothesize that: (1) Viral dose in inoculum is related to severity of disease, (2) Severity of disease is related to transmission potential, and (3) In certain contexts, chains of severe cases can build up to severe local outbreaks, and large-scale intensive epidemics. Considerable evidence from other infectious diseases substantiates this hypothesis and recent evidence from COVID-19 points in the same direction. We suggest research avenues to validate the hypothesis. If proven, our hypothesis could strengthen the scientific basis for deciding priority containment measures in various contexts in particular the importance of avoiding super-spreading events and the benefits of mass masking.

The COVID-19 pandemic: diverse contexts; different epidemics-how and why?

It is very exceptional that a new disease becomes a true pandemic. Since its emergence in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, has spread to nearly all countries of the world in only a few months. However, in different countries, the COVID-19 epidemic takes variable shapes and forms in how it affects communities. Until now, the insights gained on COVID-19 have been largely dominated by the COVID-19 epidemics and the lockdowns in China, Europe and the USA. But this variety of global trajectories is little described, analysed or understood. In only a few months, an enormous amount of scientific evidence on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 has been uncovered (knowns). But important knowledge gaps remain (unknowns). Learning from the variety of ways the COVID-19 epidemic is unfolding across the globe can potentially contribute to solving the COVID-19 puzzle. This paper tries to make sense of this variability-by exploring the important role that context plays in these different COVID-19 epidemics; by comparing COVID-19 epidemics with other respiratory diseases, including other coronaviruses that circulate continuously; and by highlighting the critical unknowns and uncertainties that remain. These unknowns and uncertainties require a deeper understanding of the variable trajectories of COVID-19. Unravelling them will be important for discerning potential future scenarios, such as the first wave in virgin territories still untouched by COVID-19 and for future waves elsewhere.