Policy strategies for capacity building and scale up of the workforce for comprehensive cancer care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer in low- and middle-income countries experience worse outcomes as a result of the limited capacity of health systems to deliver comprehensive cancer care. The health workforce is a key component of health systems; however, deep gaps exist in the availability and accessibility of cancer care providers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out a systematic review of the literature evaluating the strategies for capacity building of the cancer workforce. We studied how the policy strategies addressed the availability, accessibility, acceptability, and quality (AAAQ) of the workforce. We used a strategic planning framework (SWOT: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) to identify actionable areas of capacity building. We contextualized our findings based on the WHO 2030 Global Strategy on Human Resources for Health, evaluating how they can ultimately be framed in a labour market approach and inform strategies to improve the capacity of the workforce (PROSPERO: CRD42020109377). RESULTS: The systematic review of the literature yielded 9617 records, and we selected 45 eligible papers for data extraction. The workforce interventions identified were delivered mostly in the African and American Regions, and in two-thirds of cases, in high-income countries. Many strategies have been shown to increase the number of competent oncology providers. Optimization of the existing workforce through role delegation and digital health interventions was reported as a short- to mid-term solution to optimize cancer care, through quality-oriented, efficiency-improving, and acceptability-enforcing workforce strategies. The increased workload alone was potentially detrimental. The literature on retaining the workforce and reducing brain drain or attrition in underserved areas was commonly limited. CONCLUSIONS: Workforce capacity building is not only a quantitative problem but can also be addressed through quality-oriented, organizational, and managerial solutions of human resources. The delivery of comprehensive, acceptable, and impact-oriented cancer care requires an available, accessible, and competent workforce for comprehensive cancer care. Efficiency-improving strategies may be instrumental for capacity building in resource-constrained settings.

Cancer care for Ukrainian refugees: Strategic impact assessments in the early days of the conflict.

BACKGROUND: The invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February 2022 has resulted in destruction of healthcare infrastructure and triggered the largest wave of internally displaced populations and refugees since World War Two. Conflicts in transitioned countries such as Ukraine create new non-communicable disease (NCD) challenges, especially for cancer care for refugees and humanitarian assistance in host countries. In the early days, rapid attempts were made to model possible impacts. METHODS: By evaluating open source intelligence used in the first three months of the conflict through snowball search methods, we aimed to address: (i) burden of cancer in Ukrainian population, specifically considering translating to the refugees population, and its cancer care capacity; ii) baseline capacity/strengths of cancer systems in initial host countries. Moreover, using a baseline scenario based on crude cancer incidence in Ukraine, and considering data from UNHCR, we estimated how cancer cases would be distributed across host countries. Finally, a surveillance assessment instrument was created, intersecting health system's capacity and influx of internally displaced populations and refugees. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The total new cancer patients per month in pre-conflict Ukraine was estimated as 13,106, of which < 1 % are paediatric cases. The estimated cancer cases in the refugee population (combining prevalent and incident), assuming 7.5 million refugees by July 2022 and a female:male ratio of 9:1, was 33,121 individuals (Poland: 19284; Hungary: 3484; Moldova: 2651; Slovakia: 2421; Romania: 5281). According to our assessments, Poland is the only neighbouring country classified as green/yellow for cancer capacity, i.e. sufficient ablility to absorb additional burden into national health system; Slovakia we graded as yellow, Hungary and Romania as yellow/red and Moldova as red.

Prioritising systemic cancer therapies applying ESMO's tools and other resources to assist in improving cancer care globally: the Kazakh experience.

BACKGROUND: In Kazakhstan, cancer is the second leading cause of death with a major public health and economic burden. In the last decade, cancer care and cancer medicine costs have significantly increased. To improve the efficiency and efficacy of cancer care expenditure and planning, the Kazakhstan Ministry of Health requested assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) to review its systemic cancer treatment protocols and essential medicines list and identify high-impact, effective regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ESMO developed a four-phase approach to review Kazakhstan cancer treatment protocols: (i) perform a systematic analysis of the country's cancer medicines and treatment protocols; (ii) cross-reference the country's cancer protocols with the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines, the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale and the European Medicines Agency's medicine availability and indications database; (iii) extract treatment recommendations from the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines; (iv) expert review for all cancer medicines not on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines and the country treatment protocols. RESULTS: This ESMO four-phase approach led to the update of the Kazakhstan national essential cancer medicines list and the list of cancer treatment protocols. This review has led to the withdrawal of several low-value or non-evidence-based medicines and a budget increase for cancer care to include all essential and highly effective medicines and treatment options. CONCLUSION: When applied effectively, this four-phase approach can improve access to medicines, efficiency of expenditure and sustainability of cancer systems. The WHO-ESMO collaboration illustrated how, by sharing best practices, tools and resources, we can address access to cancer medicines and positively impact patient care.

Distribution of the workforce involved in cancer care: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: A skilled health workforce is instrumental for the delivery of multidisciplinary cancer care and in turn a critical component of the health systems. There is, however, a paucity of data on the vast inequalities in cancer workforce distribution, globally. The aim of this study is to describe the global distribution and density of the health care workforce involved in multidisciplinary cancer management. METHODS: We carried out a systematic review of the literature to determine ratios of health workers in each occupation involved in cancer care per 100 000 population and per 100 cancer patients (PROSPERO: protocol CRD42018095414). RESULTS: We identified 33 eligible papers; a majority were cross-sectional surveys (n = 16). The analysis of the ratios of health providers per population and per patients revealed deep gaps across the income areas, with gradients of workforce density, highest in high-income countries versus low-income areas. Benchmark estimates of optimal workforce availability were provided in a secondary research analysis: mainly high-income countries reported workforce capacities closer to benchmark estimates. A paucity of literature was defined for critical health providers, including for pediatric oncology, surgical oncology, and cancer nurses. CONCLUSION: The availability and distribution of the cancer workforce is heterogeneous, and wide gaps are described worldwide. This is the first systematic review on this topic. These results can inform policy formulation and modelling for capacity building and scaleup.