Applying a Primary Health Care Approach to Closing the Human Resource for Health Gaps for Immunization.

This perspective is focused on the evidence on human resources for health (HRH) solutions for immunization, as a part of a primary health care (PHC) approach.. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and 50 years since the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) clocks 50 years since its inception. was initiated, evidence and experience demonstrate the significant HRH gaps in many countries and globally, and how countries are seeking innovative ways of closing them with limited resources. The aim of this perspective article is to highlight the growing gap between the needs and the realities related to health workforce for PHC, including immunization, and to call for increasing the visibility of HRH within global and national immunization agendas. This perspective highlights key guidelines and tools to improve HRH, such as integrating immunization and primary health care, addressing the mental health needs of the health workforce, addressing gender-related issues, rationalizing the roles and composition of PHC workforce teams, and meeting the surge requirements related to health emergencies.

Immunization programs to support primary health care and achieve universal health coverage.

Gains in immunization coverage and delivery of primary health care service have stagnated in recent years. Remaining gaps in service coverage reflect multiple underlying reasons that may be amenable to improved health system design. Immunization systems and other primary health care services can be mutually supportive, for improved service delivery and for strengthening of Universal Health Coverage. Improvements require that dynamic and multi-faceted barriers and risks be addressed. These include workforce availability, quality data systems and use, leadership and management that is innovative, flexible, data driven and responsive to local needs. Concurrently, improvements in procurement, supply chain, logistics and delivery systems, and integrated monitoring of vaccine coverage and epidemiological disease surveillance with laboratory systems, and vaccine safety will be needed to support community engagement and drive prioritized actions and communication. Finally, political will and sustained resource commitment with transparent accountability mechanisms are required. The experience of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on essential PHC services and the challenges of vaccine roll-out affords an opportunity to apply lessons learned in order to enhance vaccine services integrated with strong primary health care services and universal health coverage across the life course.

Synthesizing qualitative and quantitative evidence on non-financial access barriers: implications for assessment at the district level.

INTRODUCTION: A key element of the global drive to universal health coverage is ensuring access to needed health services for everyone, and to pursue this goal in an equitable way. This requires concerted efforts to reduce disparities in access through understanding and acting on barriers facing communities with the lowest utilisation levels. Financial barriers dominate the empirical literature on health service access. Unless the full range of access barriers are investigated, efforts to promote equitable access to health care are unlikely to succeed. This paper therefore focuses on exploring the nature and extent of non-financial access barriers. METHODS: We draw upon two structured literature reviews on barriers to access and utilization of maternal, newborn and child health services in Ghana, Bangladesh, Vietnam and Rwanda. One review analyses access barriers identified in published literature using qualitative research methods; the other in published literature using quantitative analysis of household survey data. We then synthesised the key qualitative and quantitative findings through a conjoint iterative analysis. RESULTS: Five dominant themes on non-financial access barriers were identified: ethnicity; religion; physical accessibility; decision-making, gender and autonomy; and knowledge, information and education. The analysis highlighted that non-financial factors pose considerable barriers to access, many of which relate to the acceptability dimension of access and are challenging to address. Another key finding is that quantitative research methods, while yielding important findings, are inadequate for understanding non-financial access barriers in sufficient detail to develop effective responses. Qualitative research is critical in filling this gap. The analysis also indicates that the nature of non-financial access barriers vary considerably, not only between countries but also between different communities within individual countries. CONCLUSIONS: To adequately understand access barriers as a basis for developing effective strategies to address them, mixed-methods approaches are required. From an equity perspective, communities with the lowest utilisation levels should be prioritised and the access barriers specific to that community identified. It is, therefore, critical to develop approaches that can be used at the district level to diagnose and act upon access barriers if we are to pursue an equitable path to universal health coverage.

Players and processes behind the national health insurance scheme: a case study of Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Uganda is the last East African country to adopt a National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS). To lessen the inequitable burden of healthcare spending, health financing reform has focused on the establishment of national health insurance. The objective of this research is to depict how stakeholders and their power and interests have shaped the process of agenda setting and policy formulation for Uganda's proposed NHIS. The study provides a contextual analysis of the development of NHIS policy within the context of national policies and processes. METHODS: The methodology is a single case study of agenda setting and policy formulation related to the proposed NHIS in Uganda. It involves an analysis of the real-life context, the content of proposals, the process, and a retrospective stakeholder analysis in terms of policy development. Data collection comprised a literature review of published documents, technical reports, policy briefs, and memos obtained from Uganda's Ministry of Health and other unpublished sources. Formal discussions were held with ministry staff involved in the design of the scheme and some members of the task force to obtain clarification, verify events, and gain additional information. RESULTS: The process of developing the NHIS has been an incremental one, characterised by small-scale, gradual changes and repeated adjustments through various stakeholder engagements during the three phases of development: from 1995 to 1999; 2000 to 2005; and 2006 to 2011. Despite political will in the government, progress with the NHIS has been slow, and it has yet to be implemented. Stakeholders, notably the private sector, played an important role in influencing the pace of the development process and the currently proposed design of the scheme. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the importance of stakeholder analysis in major health reforms. Early use of stakeholder analysis combined with an ongoing review and revision of NHIS policy proposals during stakeholder discussions would be an effective strategy for avoiding potential pitfalls and obstacles in policy implementation. Given the private sector's influence on negotiations over health insurance design in Uganda, this paper also reviews the experience of two countries with similar stakeholder dynamics.