Scalability of digital psychological innovations for refugees: A comparative analysis in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden

E-mental health interventions may offer innovative means to increase access to psychological support and improve the mental health of refugees. However, there is limited knowledge about how these innovations can be scaled up and integrated sustainably into routine services. This study examined the scalability of a digital psychological intervention called Step-by-Step (SbS) for refugees in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden. We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 88) with Syrian refugees, and experts in SbS or mental health among refugees in the three countries. Data collection and analysis were guided by a system innovation perspective. Interviewees identified three contextual factors that influenced scalability of SbS in each country: increasing use of e-health, the COVID-19 pandemic, and political instability. Nine factors lay at the interface between the innovation and potential delivery systems, and these were categorised by culture (ways of thinking), structure (ways of organising), and practice (ways of doing). Factors related to culture included: perceived need and acceptability of the innovation. Acceptability was influenced by mental health stigma and awareness, digital trust, perceived novelty of self-help interventions, and attitudes towards non-specialist (e-helper) support. Factors related to structure included financing, regulations, accessibility, competencies of e-helpers, and quality control. Factors related to practice were barriers in the initial and continued engagement of end-users. Many actors with a potential stake in the integration of SbS across the three countries were identified, with nineteen stakeholders deemed most powerful. Several context-specific integration scenarios were developed, which need to be tested. We conclude that integrating novel e-mental health interventions for refugees into routine services will be a complex task due to the many interrelated factors and actors involved. Multi-stakeholder collaboration, including the involvement of end-users, will be essential.

The launch of the EU Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority (HERA): Improving global pandemic preparedness?

The crowded global health landscape has been joined by the European Union Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority (HERA). HERA will assume four broad areas of responsibility: horizon scanning for major health threats; research and development; support for capacity to manufacture drugs, vaccines, and equipment; and procuring and stockpiling key medical countermeasures. In this Health Reform Monitor article, we outline the reform process and describe HERA's structure and responsibilities, explore issues that arise from the creation of this new organisation, and suggest options for collaboration with existing bodies in Europe and beyond. The COVID-19 pandemic and other infectious disease outbreaks have shown the need to treat health as a cross-border issue, and there is now a broad consensus that greater direction and coordination at the European level is needed. This ambition has been matched with a considerable increase in EU funding to tackle cross-border health threats, and HERA can be used to deploy this funding in an effective manner. Yet this is contingent upon clearly defining its role and responsibilities vis-à-vis existing agencies to reduce redundancies.

Defining and conceptualising the commercial determinants of health.

Although commercial entities can contribute positively to health and society there is growing evidence that the products and practices of some commercial actors-notably the largest transnational corporations-are responsible for escalating rates of avoidable ill health, planetary damage, and social and health inequity; these problems are increasingly referred to as the commercial determinants of health. The climate emergency, the non-communicable disease epidemic, and that just four industry sectors (ie, tobacco, ultra-processed food, fossil fuel, and alcohol) already account for at least a third of global deaths illustrate the scale and huge economic cost of the problem. This paper, the first in a Series on the commercial determinants of health, explains how the shift towards market fundamentalism and increasingly powerful transnational corporations has created a pathological system in which commercial actors are increasingly enabled to cause harm and externalise the costs of doing so. Consequently, as harms to human and planetary health increase, commercial sector wealth and power increase, whereas the countervailing forces having to meet these costs (notably individuals, governments, and civil society organisations) become correspondingly impoverished and disempowered or captured by commercial interests. This power imbalance leads to policy inertia; although many policy solutions are available, they are not being implemented. Health harms are escalating, leaving health-care systems increasingly unable to cope. Governments can and must act to improve, rather than continue to threaten, the wellbeing of future generations, development, and economic growth.

Commercial determinants of health: future directions.

This paper is about the future role of the commercial sector in global health and health equity. The discussion is not about the overthrow of capitalism nor a full-throated embrace of corporate partnerships. No single solution can eradicate the harms from the commercial determinants of health-the business models, practices, and products of market actors that damage health equity and human and planetary health and wellbeing. But evidence shows that progressive economic models, international frameworks, government regulation, compliance mechanisms for commercial entities, regenerative business types and models that incorporate health, social, and environmental goals, and strategic civil society mobilisation together offer possibilities of systemic, transformative change, reduce those harms arising from commercial forces, and foster human and planetary wellbeing. In our view, the most basic public health question is not whether the world has the resources or will to take such actions, but whether humanity can survive if society fails to make this effort.

Global financing for health policy and systems research: a review of funding opportunities.

Health policy and systems research (HPSR) is a neglected area in global health financing. Despite repeated calls for greater investment, it seems that there has been little growth. We analysed trends in reported funding and activity between 2015 and 2021 using a novel real-time source of global health data, the Devex.com database, the world's largest source of funding opportunities related to international development. We performed a systematic search of the Devex.com database for HPSR-related terms with a focus on low- and middle-income countries. We included 'programs', 'tenders & grants' and 'contract awards', covering all call statuses (open, closed or forecast). Such funding opportunities were included if they were related specifically to HPSR funding or had an HPSR component; pure biomedical funding was excluded. Our findings reveal a relative neglect of HPSR, as only ∼2% of all global health funding calls included a discernible HPSR component. Despite increases in funding calls until 2019, this situation reversed in 2020, likely reflecting the redirection of resources to rapid assessments of the impacts of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Most identified projects represented small-scale opportunities-commonly for consultancies or technical assistance. To the extent that new data were generated, these projects were either tied to a specific large intervention or were narrow in scope to meet a specific challenge-with many examples informing policy responses to the Covid-19 pandemic. Nearly half of advertised funding opportunities were multi-country projects, usually addressing global policy priorities like health systems strengthening or development of coordinated public health policies at a regional level. The Covid-19 pandemic has shown why investing in HPSR is more important than ever to enable the delivery of effective health interventions and avoid costly implementation failures. The evidence presented here highlights the need to scale up efforts to convince global health funders to institutionalize the inclusion of HPSR components in all funding calls.

The return of austerity imperils global health.

Recognising the world's lack of preparedness for the COVID-19 pandemic, international organisations like the World Health Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund are calling for extensive additional funding to strengthen pandemic preparedness and response systems in low-income and middle-income countries, including through domestic resource mobilisation. This article examines the prospects of national health budgets increasing in such a context, drawing on new International Monetary Fund projections on public spending around the world. We show that by 2024 public spending will be lower than the 2010s average for almost half of all low-income and middle-income countries. A key driver of this new wave of austerity is the dramatic increase in public spending dedicated to repaying external debt-underpinned by growing debt stocks, US interest rates rises, and commodity price hikes. As in earlier crises, the stage is set for a situation where population health deteriorates-via compound effects of the pandemic and widespread economic hardship-while public health services required to tackle increased need are facing steep cuts. We conclude by considering what can be done to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

Understanding public procurement within the health sector: a priority in a post-COVID-19 world.

Every year, over 250,000 public authorities in the European Union (EU) spend about 14% of GDP on the purchase of services, works and supplies. Many are in the health sector, a sector in which public authorities are the main buyers in many countries. When these purchases exceed threshold values, EU public procurement rules apply. Public procurement is increasingly being promoted as a tool for improving efficiency and contributing to better health outcomes, and as a policy lever for achieving other government goals, such as innovation, the development of small and medium-sized enterprises, sustainable green growth and social objectives like public health and greater inclusiveness. In this paper, we describe the challenges that arise within health care systems with public procurement and identify potential solutions to them. We examined the tendering of pharmaceuticals, health technology, and e-health. In each case we identify a series of challenges relating to the complexity of the procurement process, imbalances in power on either side of transactions and the role of procurement in promoting broader public policy objectives. Finally, we recommend several actions that could stimulate better procurement, and suggest a few areas where further EU cooperation can be pursued.