Can You Hear Us Now? Equity in Global Advocacy for Palliative Care.

Evidence-based advocacy underpins the sustainable delivery of quality, publicly guaranteed, and universally available palliative care. More than 60 million people in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have no or extremely limited access to either palliative care services or essential palliative care medicines (e.g., opioids) on the World Health Organization Model List. Indeed, only 12% of the global palliative care need is currently being met. Palliative care advocacy works to bring this global public health inequity to light. Despite their expertise, palliative care practitioners in LMICs are rarely invited to health policymaking tables - even in their own countries - and are underrepresented in the academic literature produced largely in the high-income world. In this paper, palliative care experts from Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, Sudan, Uganda, and Zambia affiliated with the International Association for Hospice & Palliative Care Advocacy Focal Point Program articulate the urgent need for evidence-based advocacy, focusing on significant barriers such as urban/rural divides, cancer-centeredness, service delivery gaps, opioid formulary limitations, public policy, and education deficits. Their advocacy is situated in the context of an emerging global health narrative that stipulates palliative care provision as an ethical obligation of all health systems. To support advocacy efforts, palliative care evaluation and indicator data should assess the extent to which LMIC practitioners lead and participate in global and regional advocacy. This goal entails investment in transnational advocacy initiatives, research investments in palliative care access and cost-effective models in LMICs, and capacity building for a global community of practice to capture the attention of policymakers at all levels of health system governance.

Childhood cancer in Latin America: from detection to palliative care and survivorship.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for childhood cancer have improved substantially, although in many low- and middle-income countries survival is lagging behind. Integral childhood cancer care involves the whole spectrum from detection and diagnosis to palliative and survivorship care. METHODS: Based on a literature review and expert opinions, we summarized current practice and recommendations on the following aspects of childhood cancer in Latin America: diagnostic processes and time to diagnosis, stage at diagnosis, treatments and complications, survivorship programs and palliative care and end-of-life services. RESULTS: Latin America is a huge and heterogeneous continent. Identified barriers show similar problems between countries, both logistically (time and distance to centers, treatment interruptions) and financially (cost of care, cost of absence from work). Governmental actions in several countries improved the survival of children with cancer, but difficulties persist in timely diagnosis and providing adequate treatment to all childhood cancer patients in institutions with complete infrastructure. Treatment abandonment is still common, although the situation is improving. Cancer care in the region has mostly focused on acute treatment of the disease and has not adequately considered palliative and end-of-life care and monitoring of survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Decentralizing diagnostic activities and centralizing specialized treatment will remain necessary; measures to facilitate logistics and costs of transportation of the child and caretakers should be implemented. Twinning actions with specialized centers in high income countries for help in diagnosis, treatment and education of professionals and family members have been shown to work. Palliative and end-of-life care as well as childhood cancer survivorship plans are needed.

Latin American Clinical Epidemiology Network Series - Paper 4: Economic evaluation of Kangaroo Mother Care: cost utility analysis of results from a randomized controlled trial conducted in Bogotá.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although kangaroo mother care (KMC) has been shown to be safe and effective in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there are no published complete economic evaluations including the three components of the full intervention. METHODS: A cost utility analysis performed on the results of an RCT conducted in Bogotá, Colombia between 1993 and 1996. Hospital and ambulatory costs were estimated by microcosting in a sample of preterm infants from a University Hospital in Bogotá in 2011 and at a KMC clinic in the same period. Utility scores were assigned by experts by means of (1) direct ordering and scoring discrete health states and (2) constructing a multi-attribute utility function. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals (CIs) for the incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) were computed by the Fiellers theorem method. One-way sensitivity analysis on price estimates for valuing costs was performed. RESULTS: ICUR at 1 year of corrected age was $ -1,546 per extra quality-adjusted life year gained using the KMC method (95% CI $ -7,963 to $ 4,910). CONCLUSION: In Bogotá, the use of KMC is dominant: more effective and cost-saving. Although results from an economic analysis should not be extrapolated to different systems and communities, this dominant result suggests that KMC could be cost-effective in similar low and middle income countries settings.