Benefit-risk analysis of maintaining essential Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health (RMNCH) services against risk of COVID-19 infection

With the COVID-19 pandemic spreading across the world, its disruptive effect on the provision and utilization of non- COVID related health services have become well-documented. As countries developed mitigation strategies to help continue the delivery of essential health services through the pandemic, they needed to carefully weigh the benefits and risks of pursuing these strategies. In an attempt to assist countries in their mitigation efforts, a Benefit-Risk model was designed to provide guidance on how to compare the health benefits of sustained essential reproductive, maternal, newborn and child (RMNCH) services against the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections incurred by the countries' populations when accessing these services. This article describes how two existing models were combined to create this model, the field-testing process carried out from November 2020 through March 2021 in six countries and the findings. The overall Benefit-Risk Ratio in the 6 countries analyzed was found to be between 13.7 and 79.2, which means that for every 13.7 to 79.2 lives gained due to increased RMNCH service coverage, there was one loss of a life related to COVID-19. In all cases and for all services, the benefit of maintaining essential health services far exceeded the risks associated with additional COVID-19 infections and deaths. This modelling process illustrated how essential health services can continue to operate during a pandemic and how mitigation measures can reduce COVID-19 infections and restore or increase coverage of essential health services. Overall, this Benefit-Risk analysis underscored the importance and value of maintaining coverage of essential health services even during public health emergencies, including the recent COVID-19 pandemic

Benefit-risk analysis of maintaining essential Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health (RMNCH) services against risk of COVID-19 infection.

With the COVID-19 pandemic spreading across the world, its disruptive effect on the provision and utilization of non- COVID related health services have become well-documented. As countries developed mitigation strategies to help continue the delivery of essential health services through the pandemic, they needed to carefully weigh the benefits and risks of pursuing these strategies. In an attempt to assist countries in their mitigation efforts, a Benefit-Risk model was designed to provide guidance on how to compare the health benefits of sustained essential reproductive, maternal, newborn and child (RMNCH) services against the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections incurred by the countries' populations when accessing these services. This article describes how two existing models were combined to create this model, the field-testing process carried out from November 2020 through March 2021 in six countries and the findings. The overall Benefit-Risk Ratio in the 6 countries analyzed was found to be between 13.7 and 79.2, which means that for every 13.7 to 79.2 lives gained due to increased RMNCH service coverage, there was one loss of a life related to COVID-19. In all cases and for all services, the benefit of maintaining essential health services far exceeded the risks associated with additional COVID-19 infections and deaths. This modelling process illustrated how essential health services can continue to operate during a pandemic and how mitigation measures can reduce COVID-19 infections and restore or increase coverage of essential health services. Overall, this Benefit-Risk analysis underscored the importance and value of maintaining coverage of essential health services even during public health emergencies, including the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

Indirect effects of COVID-19 pandemic on reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health services in Pakistan.

Background: COVID-19 is having many impacts on health, economy and social life; some due to the indirect effects of closure of health facilities to curb the spread. Closures were implemented in Pakistan from March 2020, affecting provision of reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) services. Aims: To appraise the effects of containment and lockdown policies on RMNCH service utilization in order to develop an early response to avoid the catastrophic impact of COVID-19 on RMNCH in Pakistan. Methods: Routine monitoring data were analysed for indicators utilization of RMNCH care. The analysis was based on Period 1 (January-May 2020, first wave of COVID-19); Period 2 (June-September 2020, declining number of cases of COVID-19); and Period 3 (October-December 2020, second wave of COVID-19). We also compared data from May and December 2020 with corresponding months in 2019, to ascertain whether changes were due to COVID-19. Results: Reduced utilization was noted for all RMNCH indicators during Periods 1 and 3. There was a greater decline in service utilization during the first wave, and the highest reduction (~82%) was among children aged < 5 years, who were treated for pneumonia. The number of caesarean sections dropped by 57%, followed by institutional deliveries and first postnatal visit (37% each). Service utilization increased from June to September, but the second wave of COVID-19 led to another decrease. Conclusion: To reinstate routine services, priority actions and key areas include continued provision of family planning services along with uninterrupted immunization campaigns and routine maternal and child services.

Stark choices: exploring health sector costs of policy responses to COVID-19 in low-income and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has altered health sector capacity in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Cost data to inform evidence-based priority setting are urgently needed. Consequently, in this paper, we calculate the full economic health sector costs of COVID-19 clinical management in 79 LMICs under different epidemiological scenarios. METHODS: We used country-specific epidemiological projections from a dynamic transmission model to determine number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths over 1 year under four mitigation scenarios. We defined the health sector response for three base LMICs through guidelines and expert opinion. We calculated costs through local resource use and price data and extrapolated costs across 79 LMICs. Lastly, we compared cost estimates against gross domestic product (GDP) and total annual health expenditure in 76 LMICs. RESULTS: COVID-19 clinical management costs vary greatly by country, ranging between <0.1%-12% of GDP and 0.4%-223% of total annual health expenditure (excluding out-of-pocket payments). Without mitigation policies, COVID-19 clinical management costs per capita range from US$43.39 to US$75.57; in 22 of 76 LMICs, these costs would surpass total annual health expenditure. In a scenario of stringent social distancing, costs per capita fall to US$1.10-US$1.32. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first dataset of COVID-19 clinical management costs across LMICs. These costs can be used to inform decision-making on priority setting. Our results show that COVID-19 clinical management costs in LMICs are substantial, even in scenarios of moderate social distancing. Low-income countries are particularly vulnerable and some will struggle to cope with almost any epidemiological scenario. The choices facing LMICs are likely to remain stark and emergency financial support will be needed.