Public sector engagement of private healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uttar Pradesh, India

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained public health resources and overwhelmed health systems capacity of countries worldwide. In India, the private sector is a significant source of healthcare particularly in large states like Uttar Pradesh (UP). This study sought to examine: (i) the government's approach to engaging the private health sector in the COVID-19 response in UP;(ii) the effects of government's engagement on private providers' practices and (iii) the barriers and facilitators to effective private sector engagement during the period. While the literature acknowledges weaknesses in private sector engagement during emergencies, our study provides deep empirical insight into how this occurs, drawing on the UP experience. We reviewed 102 Government of UP (GOUP) policy documents and conducted 36 in-depth interviews with government officials, technical partners, and private providers at district- and state-levels. We developed timelines for policy change based on the policy review and analyzed interview transcripts thematically using a framework analysis. We found that GOUP's engagement of the private sector and private providers' experiences varied substantially. While the government rapidly engaged and mobilized private laboratories, and enlisted private hospitals to provide COVID-19 services, it undertook only limited engagement of solo private providers who largely acted as referral units for suspected cases and reported data to support contact tracing efforts. Informal private providers played no formal role in the COVID-19 response, but in one district supported community-level contact tracing. Allopathic, alternative medicine, and diagnostic private providers faced common barriers and facilitators affecting their engagement relating to provider fear, communication, testing capacity, case reporting, and regulations. The establishment of mixed diagnostic networks during COVID-19 demonstrates the potential for public-private collaboration, however, our study also reveals missed opportunities to engage smaller-scale private health providers and establish mechanisms to effectively communicate and mobilize them during the pandemic, and beyond.

Public sector engagement of private healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uttar Pradesh, India.

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained public health resources and overwhelmed health systems capacity of countries worldwide. In India, the private sector is a significant source of healthcare particularly in large states like Uttar Pradesh (UP). This study sought to examine: (i) the government's approach to engaging the private health sector in the COVID-19 response in UP; (ii) the effects of government's engagement on private providers' practices and (iii) the barriers and facilitators to effective private sector engagement during the period. While the literature acknowledges weaknesses in private sector engagement during emergencies, our study provides deep empirical insight into how this occurs, drawing on the UP experience. We reviewed 102 Government of UP (GOUP) policy documents and conducted 36 in-depth interviews with government officials, technical partners, and private providers at district- and state-levels. We developed timelines for policy change based on the policy review and analyzed interview transcripts thematically using a framework analysis. We found that GOUP's engagement of the private sector and private providers' experiences varied substantially. While the government rapidly engaged and mobilized private laboratories, and enlisted private hospitals to provide COVID-19 services, it undertook only limited engagement of solo private providers who largely acted as referral units for suspected cases and reported data to support contact tracing efforts. Informal private providers played no formal role in the COVID-19 response, but in one district supported community-level contact tracing. Allopathic, alternative medicine, and diagnostic private providers faced common barriers and facilitators affecting their engagement relating to provider fear, communication, testing capacity, case reporting, and regulations. The establishment of mixed diagnostic networks during COVID-19 demonstrates the potential for public-private collaboration, however, our study also reveals missed opportunities to engage smaller-scale private health providers and establish mechanisms to effectively communicate and mobilize them during the pandemic, and beyond.

Selfie consents, remote rapport, and Zoom debriefings: collecting qualitative data amid a pandemic in four resource-constrained settings.

In-person interactions have traditionally been the gold standard for qualitative data collection. The COVID-19 pandemic required researchers to consider if remote data collection can meet research objectives, while retaining the same level of data quality and participant protections. We use four case studies from the Philippines, Zambia, India and Uganda to assess the challenges and opportunities of remote data collection during COVID-19. We present lessons learned that may inform practice in similar settings, as well as reflections for the field of qualitative inquiry in the post-COVID-19 era. Key challenges and strategies to overcome them included the need for adapted researcher training in the use of technologies and consent procedures, preparation for abbreviated interviews due to connectivity concerns, and the adoption of regular researcher debriefings. Participant outreach to allay suspicions ranged from communicating study information through multiple channels to highlighting associations with local institutions to boost credibility. Interviews were largely successful, and contained a meaningful level of depth, nuance and conviction that allowed teams to meet study objectives. Rapport still benefitted from conventional interviewer skills, including attentiveness and fluency with interview guides. While differently abled populations may encounter different barriers, the included case studies, which varied in geography and aims, all experienced more rapid recruitment and robust enrollment. Reduced in-person travel lowered interview costs and increased participation among groups who may not have otherwise attended. In our view, remote data collection is not a replacement for in-person endeavours, but a highly beneficial complement. It may increase accessibility and equity in participant contributions and lower costs, while maintaining rich data collection in multiple study target populations and settings.

The need for COVID-19 research in low- and middle-income countries.

In the early months of the pandemic, most reported cases and deaths due to COVID-19 occurred in high-income countries. However, insufficient testing could have led to an underestimation of true infections in many low- and middle-income countries. As confirmed cases increase, the ultimate impact of the pandemic on individuals and communities in low- and middle-income countries is uncertain. We therefore propose research in three broad areas as urgently needed to inform responses in low- and middle-income countries: transmission patterns of SARS-CoV-2, the clinical characteristics of the disease, and the impact of pandemic prevention and response measures. Answering these questions will require a multidisciplinary approach led by local investigators and in some cases additional resources. Targeted research activities should be done to help mitigate the potential burden of COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries without diverting the limited human resources, funding, or medical supplies from response activities.