Effective international action against undernutrition: why has it proven so difficult and what can be done to accelerate progress?

Many transnational organisations work to support efforts to eliminate maternal and child undernutrition in high-burden countries. Financial, intellectual, and personal linkages bind these organisations loosely together as components of an international nutrition system. In this paper, we argue that such a system should deliver in four functional areas: stewardship, mobilisation of financial resources, direct provision of nutrition services at times of natural disaster or conflict, and human and institutional resource strengthening. We review quantitative and qualitative data from various sources to assess the performance of the system in each of these areas, and find substantial shortcomings. Fragmentation, lack of an evidence base for prioritised action, institutional inertia, and failure to join up with promising developments in parallel sectors are recurrent themes. Many of these weaknesses can be attributed to systemic problems affecting most organisations working in the field; these are analysed using a problem tree approach. We also make recommendations to overcome some of the most important problems, and we propose five priority actions for the development of a new international architecture.

What works? Interventions for maternal and child undernutrition and survival.

We reviewed interventions that affect maternal and child undernutrition and nutrition-related outcomes. These interventions included promotion of breastfeeding; strategies to promote complementary feeding, with or without provision of food supplements; micronutrient interventions; general supportive strategies to improve family and community nutrition; and reduction of disease burden (promotion of handwashing and strategies to reduce the burden of malaria in pregnancy). We showed that although strategies for breastfeeding promotion have a large effect on survival, their effect on stunting is small. In populations with sufficient food, education about complementary feeding increased height-for-age Z score by 0.25 (95% CI 0.01-0.49), whereas provision of food supplements (with or without education) in populations with insufficient food increased the height-for-age Z score by 0.41 (0.05-0.76). Management of severe acute malnutrition according to WHO guidelines reduced the case-fatality rate by 55% (risk ratio 0.45, 0.32-0.62), and recent studies suggest that newer commodities, such as ready-to-use therapeutic foods, can be used to manage severe acute malnutrition in community settings. Effective micronutrient interventions for pregnant women included supplementation with iron folate (which increased haemoglobin at term by 12 g/L, 2.93-21.07) and micronutrients (which reduced the risk of low birthweight at term by 16% (relative risk 0.84, 0.74-0.95). Recommended micronutrient interventions for children included strategies for supplementation of vitamin A (in the neonatal period and late infancy), preventive zinc supplements, iron supplements for children in areas where malaria is not endemic, and universal promotion of iodised salt. We used a cohort model to assess the potential effect of these interventions on mothers and children in the 36 countries that have 90% of children with stunted linear growth. The model showed that existing interventions that were designed to improve nutrition and prevent related disease could reduce stunting at 36 months by 36%; mortality between birth and 36 months by about 25%; and disability-adjusted life-years associated with stunting, severe wasting, intrauterine growth restriction, and micronutrient deficiencies by about 25%. To eliminate stunting in the longer term, these interventions should be supplemented by improvements in the underlying determinants of undernutrition, such as poverty, poor education, disease burden, and lack of women's empowerment.

Making health insurance work for the poor: learning from the Self-Employed Women's Association's (SEWA) community-based health insurance scheme in India.

How best to provide effective protection for the poorest against the financial risks of ill health remains an unanswered policy question. Community-based health insurance (CBHI) schemes, by pooling risks and resources, can in principal offer protection against the risk of medical expenses, and make accessible health care services that would otherwise be unaffordable. The purpose of this paper is to measure the distributional impact of a large CBHI scheme in Gujarat, India, which reimburses hospitalization costs, and to identify barriers to optimal distributional impact. The study found that the Vimo Self-employed Women's Association (SEWA) scheme is inclusive of the poorest, with 32% of rural members, and 40% of urban members, drawn from households below the 30th percentile of socio-economic status. Submission of claims for inpatient care is equitable in Ahmedabad City, but inequitable in rural areas. The financially better off in rural areas are significantly more likely to submit claims than are the poorest, and men are significantly more likely to submit claims than women. Members living in areas that have better access to health care submit more claims than those living in remote areas. A variety of factors prevent the poorest in rural and remote areas from accessing inpatient care or from submitting a claim. The study concludes that even a well-intentioned scheme may have an undesirable distributional impact, particularly if: (1) the scheme does not address the major barriers to accessing (inpatient) health care; and (2) the process of seeking reimbursement under the scheme is burdensome for the poor. Design and implementation of an equitable scheme must involve: a careful assessment of barriers to health care seeking; interventions to address the main barriers; and reimbursement requiring minimum paperwork and at the time/place of service utilization.

To retain or remove user fees?: reflections on the current debate in low- and middle-income countries.

Many low- and middle-income countries continue to search for better ways of financing their health systems. Common to many of these systems are problems of inadequate resource mobilisation, as well as inefficient and inequitable use of existing resources. The poor and other vulnerable groups who need healthcare the most are also the most affected by these shortcomings. In particular, these groups have a high reliance on user fees and other out-of-pocket expenditures on health which are both impoverishing and provide a financial barrier to care. It is within this context, and in light of recent policy initiatives on user fee removal, that a debate on the role of user fees in health financing systems has recently returned. This paper provides some reflections on the recent user fees debate, drawing from the evidence presented and subsequent discussions at a recent UNICEF consultation on user fees in the health sector, and relates the debate to the wider issue of access to adequate healthcare. It is argued that, from the wealth of evidence on user fees and other health system reforms, a broad consensus is emerging. First, user fees are an important barrier to accessing health services, especially for poor people. They also negatively impact on adherence to long-term expensive treatments. However, this is offset to some extent by potentially positive impacts on quality. Secondly, user fees are not the only barrier that the poor face. As well as other cost barriers, a number of quality, information and cultural barriers must also be overcome before the poor can access adequate health services. Thirdly, initial evidence on fee abolition in Uganda suggests that this policy has improved access to outpatient services for the poor. For this to be sustainable and effective in reaching the poor, fee removal needs to be part of a broader package of reforms that includes increased budgets to offset lost fee revenue (as was the case in Uganda). Fourthly, implementation matters: if fees are to be abolished, this needs clear communication with a broad stakeholder buy-in, careful monitoring to ensure that official fees are not replaced by informal fees, and appropriate management of the alternative financing mechanisms that are replacing user fees. Fifthly, context is crucial. For instance, immediate fee removal in Cambodia would be inappropriate, given that fees replaced irregular and often high informal fees. In this context, equity funds and eventual expansion of health insurance are perhaps more viable policy options. Conversely, in countries where user fees have had significant adverse effects on access and generated only limited benefits, fee abolition is probably a more attractive policy option. Removing user fees has the potential to improve access to health services, especially for the poor, but it is not appropriate in all contexts. Analysis should move on from broad evaluations of user fees towards exploring how best to dismantle the multiple barriers to access in specific contexts.

Monetary incentives in primary health care and effects on use and coverage of preventive health care interventions in rural Honduras: cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Scaling-up of effective preventive interventions in child and maternal health is constrained in many developing countries by lack of demand. In Latin America, some governments have been trying to increase demand for health interventions by making direct payments to poor households contingent on them keeping up-to-date with preventive health services. We undertook a public health programme effectiveness trial in Honduras to assess this approach, contrasting it with a direct transfer of resources to local health teams. METHODS: 70 municipalities were selected because they had the country's highest prevalence of malnutrition. They were allocated at random to four groups: money to households; resources to local health teams combined with a community-based nutrition intervention; both packages; and neither. Evaluation surveys of about 5600 households were undertaken at baseline and roughly 2 years later. Pregnant women and mothers of children younger than 3 years old were asked about use of health services (primary outcome) and coverage of interventions such as immunisation and growth monitoring (secondary outcome). Reports were supplemented with data from children's health cards and government service utilisation data. Analysis was by mixed effects regression, accounting for the municipality-level randomisation. FINDINGS: The household-level intervention had a large impact (15-20 percentage points; p<0.01) on the reported coverage of antenatal care and well-child check-ups. Childhood immunisation series could thus be started more opportunely, and the coverage of growth monitoring was markedly increased (15-21 percentage points; p<0.01. Measles and tetanus toxoid immunisation were not affected. The transfer of resources to local health teams could not be implemented properly because of legal complications. INTERPRETATION: Conditional payments to households increase the use and coverage of preventive health care interventions.

Assessing the impact of integrated community case management (iCCM) programs on child mortality: Review of early results and lessons learned in sub-Saharan Africa.

AIM: To accelerate progress in reducing child mortality, many countries in sub-Saharan Africa have adopted and scaled-up integrated community case management (iCCM) programs targeting the three major infectious killers of children under-five. The programs train lay community health workers to assess, classify and treat uncomplicated cases of pneumonia with antibiotics, malaria with antimalarial drugs and diarrhea with Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS) and zinc. Although management of these conditions with the respective appropriate drugs has proven efficacious in randomized trials, the effectiveness of large iCCM scale-up programs in reducing child mortality is yet to be demonstrated. This paper reviews recent experience in documenting and attributing changes in under-five mortality to the specific interventions of a variety of iCCM programs. METHODS: Eight recent studies have been identified and assessed in terms of design, mortality measurement and results. Impact of the iCCM program on mortality among children age 2-59 months was assessed through a difference in differences approach using random effect Poisson regression. RESULTS: Designs used by these studies include cluster randomized trials, randomized stepped-wedge and quasi-experimental trials. Child mortality is measured through demographic surveillance or household survey with full birth history conducted at the end of program implementation. Six of the eight studies showed a higher decline in mortality among children 2-59 months in program areas compared to comparison areas, although this acceleration was statistically significant in only one study with a decline of 76% larger in intervention than in comparison areas. CONCLUSION: Studies that evaluate large scale iCCM programs and include assessment of mortality impact must ensure an appropriate design. This includes required sample sizes and sufficient number of program and comparison districts that allow adequate inference and attribution of impact. In addition, large-scale program utilization, and a significant increase in coverage of care seeking and treatment of targeted childhood illnesses are preconditions to measurable mortality impact. Those issues need to be addressed before large investments in assessing changes in child mortality is undertaken, or the results of mortality impact evaluation will most likely be inconclusive.