RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Millions of women give birth annually without the support of a trained birth attendant. Generally and globally, countries provide maternal health services for their citizens but there is a coverage gap for undocumented migrant women who often can't access the same care due to their legal status. The objective of this investigation is to explore undocumented migrants' experiences and perceptions of maternal healthcare accessibility. METHODS: We held focus groups discussions with 64 pregnant women at 3 migrant health clinics on the Thailand-Myanmar border and asked how they learned about the clinic, their health care options, travel and past experiences with birth services. In this context undocumented women could sign up for migrant health insurance at the clinic that would allow them to be referred for tertiary care at government hospitals if needed. RESULTS: Women learned about care options through a network approach often relying on information from community members and trusted care providers. For many, choice of alternate care was limited by lack of antenatal care services close to their homes, limited knowledge of other services and inability to pay fees associated with hospital care. Women travelled up to 4 h to get to the clinic by foot, bicycle, tractor, motorcycle or car, sometimes using multiple modes of transport. Journeys from the Myanmar side of the border were sometimes complicated by nighttime border crossing closures, limited transport and heavy rain. CONCLUSIONS: Undocumented migrant women in our study experienced a type of conditional or variable accessibility where time of day, transport and weather needed to align with the onset of labour to ensure that they could get to the migrant clinic on time to give birth. We anticipate that undocumented migrants in other countries may also experience conditional accessibility to birth care, especially where travel is necessary due to limited local services. Care providers may improve opportunities for undocumented pregnant women to access maternal care by disseminating information on available services through informal networks and addressing travel barriers through mobile services and other travel supports. Trial registration The research project was approved by Research Ethics Committee at the Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University (FAM-2560-05204), and the Department of Community Medicine and Global Health at the University of Oslo-Norwegian Centre for Research Data (58542).
Undocumented pregnant migrants have difficulties and limitations in accessing maternal health care services. Although the governments have tried to provide maternal health care services to all, there is still a gap in coverage among this population. This study explores how undocumented pregnant migrants perceive their ability to access maternal health care and share their experiences when utilizing it. We used focus groups to interview 64 pregnant women at three migrant health clinics on the ThailandMyanmar border. We asked how they learned about the clinic, their health care options, travel, and past experiences with birth services. The results showed that they usually knew about care options from community members and trusted care providers. The limitations for the choice of alternate care were due to a lack of services close to their homes, limited knowledge of other services, inability to pay hospital fees, and difficulty traveling from their residence to the clinic. Therefore, we anticipate that undocumented migrants in other countries may also experience difficulties in accessibility to birth care, especially where travel is necessary due to limited local services. Care providers may improve opportunities for these migrants to access maternal care by disseminating information on available services through informal networks and addressing travel barriers through mobile services and other travel supports.
Asunto(s)
Migrantes , Femenino , Embarazo , Humanos , Investigación Cualitativa , Tailandia , Mianmar , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Instituciones de Atención AmbulatoriaRESUMEN
Due to constraints on institutional capacity and financial resources, the road to universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices. To assist with these choices, scholars and policy makers have done extensive work on criteria to assess the substantive fairness of health financing policies: their impact on the distribution of rights, duties, benefits and burdens on the path towards UHC. However, less attention has been paid to the procedural fairness of health financing decisions. The Accountability for Reasonableness Framework (A4R), which is widely applied to assess procedural fairness, has primarily been used in priority-setting for purchasing decisions, with revenue mobilization and pooling receiving limited attention. Furthermore, the sufficiency of the A4R framework's four criteria (publicity, relevance, revisions and appeals, and enforcement) has been questioned. Moreover, research in political theory and public administration (including deliberative democracy), public finance, environmental management, psychology, and health financing has examined the key features of procedural fairness, but these insights have not been synthesized into a comprehensive set of criteria for fair decision-making processes in health financing. A systematic study of how these criteria have been applied in decision-making situations related to health financing and in other areas is also lacking. This paper addresses these gaps through a scoping review. It argues that the literature across many disciplines can be synthesized into 10 core criteria with common philosophical foundations. These go beyond A4R and encompass equality, impartiality, consistency over time, reason-giving, transparency, accuracy of information, participation, inclusiveness, revisability and enforcement. These criteria can be used to evaluate and guide decision-making processes for financing UHC across different country income levels and health financing arrangements. The review also presents examples of how these criteria have been applied to decisions in health financing and other sectors.
Asunto(s)
Prioridades en Salud , Financiación de la Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Política de Salud , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud , Responsabilidad SocialRESUMEN
Countermeasures for mpox (formerly known as monkeypox), primarily vaccines, have been in limited supply in many countries during outbreaks. Equitable allocation of scarce resources during public health emergencies is a complex challenge. Identifying the objectives and core values for the allocation of mpox countermeasures, using those values to provide guidance for priority groups and prioritisation tiers, and optimising allocation implementation are important. The fundamental values for the allocation of mpox countermeasures are: preventing death and illness; reducing the association between death or illness and unjust disparities; prioritising those who prevent harm or mitigate disparities; recognising contributions to combating an outbreak; and treating similar individuals similarly. Ethically and equitably marshalling available countermeasures requires articulating these fundamental objectives, identifying priority tiers, and recognising trade-offs between prioritising the people at the highest risk of infection and the people at the highest risk of harm if infected. These five values can provide guidance on preferable priority categories for a more ethically sound response and suggest methods for optimising allocation of countermeasures for mpox and other diseases for which countermeasures are in short supply. Properly marshalling available countermeasures will be crucial for future effective and equitable national responses to outbreaks.
Asunto(s)
Monkeypox virus , Mpox , Humanos , Mpox/epidemiología , Mpox/prevención & control , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Salud PúblicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Geographical differences in health outcomes are reported in many countries. Norway has led an active policy aiming for regional balance since the 1970s. Using data from the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) 2019, we examined regional differences in development and current state of health across Norwegian counties. METHODS: Data for life expectancy, healthy life expectancy (HALE), years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in Norway and its 11 counties from 1990 to 2019 were extracted from GBD 2019. County-specific contributors to changes in life expectancy were compared. Inequality in disease burden was examined by use of the Gini coefficient. FINDINGS: Life expectancy and HALE improved in all Norwegian counties from 1990 to 2019. Improvements in life expectancy and HALE were greatest in the two counties with the lowest values in 1990: Oslo, in which life expectancy and HALE increased from 71·9 years (95% uncertainty interval 71·4-72·4) and 63·0 years (60·5-65·4) in 1990 to 81·3 years (80·0-82·7) and 70·6 years (67·4-73·6) in 2019, respectively; and Troms og Finnmark, in which life expectancy and HALE increased from 71·9 years (71·5-72·4) and 63·5 years (60·9-65·6) in 1990 to 80·3 years (79·4-81·2) and 70·0 years (66·8-72·2) in 2019, respectively. Increased life expectancy was mainly due to reductions in cardiovascular disease, neoplasms, and respiratory infections. No significant differences between the national YLD or DALY rates and the corresponding age-standardised rates were reported in any of the counties in 2019; however, Troms og Finnmark had a higher age-standardised YLL rate than the national rate (8394 per 100â000 [95% UI 7801-8944] vs 7536 per 100â000 [7391-7691]). Low inequality between counties was shown for life expectancy, HALE, all level-1 causes of DALYs, and exposure to level-1 risk factors. INTERPRETATION: Over the past 30 years, Norway has reduced inequality in disease burden between counties. However, inequalities still exist at a within-county level and along other sociodemographic gradients. Because of insufficient Norwegian primary data, there remains substantial uncertainty associated with regional estimates for non-fatal disease burden and exposure to risk factors. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Research Council of Norway, and Norwegian Institute of Public Health.
Asunto(s)
Carga Global de Enfermedades , Esperanza de Vida , Costo de Enfermedad , Esperanza de Vida Saludable , Humanos , Noruega/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Global health crises require coordination and collaboration among actors and global health agendas including health security, health promotion, and universal health coverage. This study investigated whether national public health institutes (NPHIs) unify agendas and actors, how this can be achieved, and what factors contribute to success. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 public health leaders from 18 countries in six WHO regions between 2019 and 2020. Respondents described how NPHIs bridge agendas reporting five strategies that institutes employ: serving as a trusted scientific advisor; convening actors across and within sectors; prioritizing transdisciplinary approaches; integrating public health infrastructures, and training that builds public health capacity. Findings also revealed five enabling factors critical to success: a strong legal foundation; scientific independence; public trust and legitimacy; networks and partnerships at global, national, and local levels; and stable funding. The Covid-19 pandemic underscores the urgency of securing scientific independence and promoting national institutes' responsiveness to public health challenges.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Salud Global , COVID-19/epidemiología , Humanos , Pandemias , Salud Pública , Administración en Salud PúblicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Many countries aspiring to achieve universal health coverage struggle with how to ensure health coverage for undocumented migrants. Using a case study of maternal health care in a Thailand-Myanmar border region this article explores coverage for migrants, service provision challenges and the contribution of a voluntary health insurance program. METHODS: In 2018 we interviewed 18 key informants who provided, oversaw or contributed to maternal healthcare services for migrant women in the border region of Tak province, Thailand. RESULTS: In this region, we found that public and non-profit providers helped increase healthcare coverage beyond undocumented migrants' official entitlements. Interview participants explained that Free and low-cost antenatal care (ANC) is provided to undocumented migrants through migrant specific clinics, outreach programs and health posts. Hospitals offer emergency birth care, although uninsured migrant patients are subsequently billed for the services. Care providers identified sustainability, institutional debt from unpaid obstetric hospital bills, cross border logistical difficulties and the late arrival of patients requiring emergency lifesaving interventions as challenges when providing care to undocumented migrants. An insurance fund was developed to provide coverage for costly emergency interventions at Thai government hospitals. The insurance fund, along with existing free and low-cost services, helped increase population coverage, range of services and financial protection for undocumented migrants. CONCLUSIONS: This case study offers considerations for extending health coverage to undocumented populations. Non-profit insurance funds can help to improve healthcare entitlements, provide financial protection and reduce service providers' debt. However, there are limits to programs that offer voluntary coverage for undocumented migrants. High costs associated with emergency interventions along with gaps in insurance coverage challenge the sustainability for NGO, non-profit and government health providers and may be financially disastrous for patients. Finally, in international border regions with high mobility, it may be valuable to implement and strengthen cross border referrals and health insurance for migrants.
Asunto(s)
Migrantes , Femenino , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Salud Materna , Mianmar , Embarazo , Tailandia , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de SaludRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Despite the documented benefits of using health technology assessments (HTA) to inform resource allocation in health care systems, HTA remains underused, especially in low- and middle-income countries. A survey of global health practitioners was conducted to reveal the top reasons ("excuses") that they had heard from colleagues, policymakers or other stakeholders for not using HTA in their settings. METHODS: There were 193 respondents to the survey. Most responses were from individuals in research organisations (37%), ministries of health (27%) and other government agencies (14%). Participants came from Southeast Asia (40%), the Western Pacific (30%), Africa (15%), Europe (7%), the Americas (7%) and the Eastern Mediterranean region (2%). RESULTS: The top five reasons encountered by respondents related to lack of data, lack of technical skills for HTA, the technocratic nature of the work, the lack of explicit decision rules and the perception that HTA puts a "price on life". CONCLUSIONS: This study aimed to understand and address the top reasons for not using HTA. They fall into three categories: (1) misconceptions about HTA; (2) feasibility issues; and (3) values, attitudes and politics. Previous literature has shown that these reasons can be addressed when identified, and even imperfect HTA analyses can provide useful information to a decision-maker.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Health technology assessments (HTAs) have been suggested as a strategy to bridge the evidence-to-policy gap in public health. It is unclear to what extent HTAs have been prepared to assist decisions to implement public health interventions (PHIs). We aimed to describe the experience of HTA agencies by mapping, classifying, and analyzing the evidence content of HTAs of PHIs. METHODS: We systematically searched databases of 35 HTA agencies from 18 countries for evaluations of PHIs between 2008-2018. Interventions were classified using the International Classification of Health Interventions and the evidence content analysed with the INAHTA Product-Type-mark checklist. RESULTS: Only 1010 (9%) of HTAs were on PHIs. 500 (50%) publications targeted Body Systems and Functions, 302 (30%) Health-related Behaviours, 137 (14%) the Environment and 44 (4%) Activities and Participation Domains. Out of 734 publications perused, few met the criteria of full-HTAs (71;10%) or mini-HTAs (110;15%). Most were rapid reviews (420;57%). 72% of all reports came from only 6 countries. CONCLUSION: HTAs on PHIs were uncommon relative to clinical interventions. HTAs on population-based PHIs were less comprehensive in quality and rigor of the evidence. Countries with more resources and mature HTA-systems had done the most evaluations. Exploring the experiences of forerunners could help overcome barriers to evaluations of PHIs and exploit the full potential of HTAs to promote evidence-based public health.
Asunto(s)
Salud Pública , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In precision medicine biomarkers stratify patients into groups that are offered different treatments, but this may conflict with the principle of equal treatment. While some patient characteristics are seen as relevant for unequal treatment and others not, it is known that they all may influence treatment decisions. How biomarkers influence these decisions is not known, nor is their ethical relevance well discussed. METHODS: We distributed an email survey designed to elicit treatment preferences from Norwegian doctors working with cancer patients. In a forced-choice conjoint analysis pairs of hypothetical patients were presented, and we calculated the average marginal component effect of seven individual patient characteristics, to estimate how each of them influence doctors' priority-setting decisions. RESULTS: A positive biomarker status increased the probability of being allocated the new drug, while older age, severe comorbidity and reduced physical function reduced the probability. Importantly, sex, education level and smoking status had no significant influence on the decision. CONCLUSION: Biomarker status is perceived as relevant for priority setting decisions, alongside more well-known patient characteristics like age, physical function and comorbidity. Based on our results, we discuss a framework that can help clarify whether biomarker status should be seen as an ethically acceptable factor for providing unequal treatment to patients with the same disease.
Asunto(s)
Médicos , Medicina de Precisión , Anciano , Toma de Decisiones , Humanos , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Intersectoral collaboration is critical to the successful implementation of many public health interventions (PHIs). Little attention has been paid to whether and how processes at the stage of evaluation can promote intersectoral collaboration. The objective of this study was to examine European experiences and views on whether and how the evaluation of PHIs promote intersectoral collaboration. METHODS: A qualitative study design was used. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 individuals centrally involved in the evaluation of PHIs in 6 European countries (Austria, Denmark, England, Germany, Norway, and Switzerland). Questions pertained to current processes for evaluating PHIs in the country and current and potential strategies for promoting intersectoral collaboration. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes responding to our primary objective. RESULTS: Experiences with promoting intersectoral collaboration through the evaluation of PHIs could be summarized in 4 themes: (1) Early involvement of non-health sectors in the evaluative process and inclusion of non-health benefits can promote intersectoral collaboration, but should be combined with greater influence of these sectors in shaping PHIs; (2) Harmonization of methodological approaches may enable comparison of results and facilitate intersectoral collaboration, but should not be an overriding goal; (3) Involvement in health impact assessments (HIAs) can promote intersectoral collaboration, but needs to be incentivized and be conducted without putting overwhelming demands on non-health sectors; (4) A designated body for evaluating PHIs may promote intersectoral collaboration, but its design needs to take account of realities of policy-making. CONCLUSION: The full potential for promoting intersectoral collaboration through the evaluation of PHIs appears currently unrealized in the settings we studied. To further promote intersectoral collaboration, evaluators and decision-makers may consider the full range of strategies characterized in this study. This may be most effective if the strategies are deployed so that they reinforce each other, value outcomes beyond health, and are tailored to maximize political priority for PHIs across sectors.
Asunto(s)
Colaboración Intersectorial , Salud Pública , Europa (Continente) , Evaluación del Impacto en la Salud , Humanos , Formulación de PolíticasRESUMEN
This comment reflects on an article by Oortwijn, Jansen, and Baltussen about the use and features of 'evidence-informed deliberative processes' (EDPs) among health technology assessment (HTA) agencies around the world and the need for more guidance. First, we highlight procedural aspects that are relevant across key steps of EDP, focusing on conflict of interest, the different roles of stakeholders throughout a HTA and public justification of decisions. Second, we discuss new knowledge and models needed to maximize the value of deliberative processes at the expanding frontiers of HTA, paying special attention to when HTA is applied in primary care, employed for public health interventions, and is produced through international collaboration.
Asunto(s)
Salud Pública , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Choosing where to give birth can be a matter of life and death for both mother and child. Migrants, registered or unregistered, may face different choices and challenges than non-migrants. Despite this, previous research on the factors migrant women consider when deciding where to give birth is very limited. This paper addresses this gap by examining women's decision making in a respective border and urban locale in Thailand. METHODS: We held focus group discussions [13] with 72 non-Thai pregnant migrant women at non-government clinics in a rural border area and at two hospitals in Chiang Mai, a large city in Northern Thailand in 2018. We asked women where they will go to give birth and to explain the factors that influenced their decision. RESULTS: Women identified getting the relevant documentation necessary to register their child's birth, safe birth and medical advice/quality care, as the top three factors that influenced their care seeking decision making. Language of service, free or low cost care, language of services, proximity to home, and limited alternate options for care were also identified as important considerations. CONCLUSION: Understanding factors that migrant women value when choosing where to deliver can help health care providers to create services that are responsive to migrants' preferences and encourage provision of relevant information which may influence patient decision making. The desire to obtain birth documentation for their child appears to be important for migrants who understand the importance of personal documentation for the lives of their children. Healthcare institutions may wish to introduce processes to facilitate obtaining documentation for pregnant migrant women and their newborns.
Asunto(s)
Conducta de Elección , Toma de Decisiones , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Parto/psicología , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/psicología , Mujeres Embarazadas/psicología , Migrantes/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Investigación Cualitativa , TailandiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Migrants experience stress before, during and after migrating to a new country, all of which influences their mental wellbeing. In Norway, migration from Thailand is highly gendered as most Thai migrants are women who migrate to live with their Norwegian spouse. Massage shops, often owned by Thai entrepreneurs, are a locale where women use their cultural knowledge to bridge into the local economy. There is little knowledge about Thai migrant masseuses' experience of stress in daily life and associated coping strategies. The objective of this inquiry was to examine stressors and coping strategies among Thai migrant masseuses in Oslo, Norway. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 14 Thai migrants who were working as masseuses in Oslo, Norway. We asked participants about their health, experiences of stress, and coping strategies and subsequently analyzed the data using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Stress in participants' lives related to settling in, loneliness, finances and spousal relationships. Of these, relationship conflict was the largest source of stress. Women largely embraced self-coping strategies and utilized Thai cultural practices and Buddhist cognitive thinking. Once relationship conflict became untenable, participants fought to change their situation. Limited fluency in Norwegian, Thai stigma about mental health and limited knowledge of the Norwegian health system were barriers to seeking healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Migrants in our study often adopted "Thainess", the use of Thai cultural practices and Buddhist cognitive thinking, as a strategy for coping with stress. Preferences for self-coping, mental health stigma, and linguistic competency are important considerations when designing mental wellbeing interventions for Thai women. Use of an interpreter or systems navigator can help overcome language barriers. Clinicians can take detailed case histories to better understand Thai patients' stress, coping strategies and wellbeing. Health policy makers could consider network approaches, including using Thai health systems navigators to bridge the health system and Thai communities.
Asunto(s)
Adaptación Psicológica , Enfermedades Profesionales/psicología , Estrés Psicológico/psicología , Migrantes/psicología , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masaje , Salud Mental , Persona de Mediana Edad , Noruega , Enfermedades Profesionales/etnología , Investigación Cualitativa , Estigma Social , Estrés Psicológico/etnología , Tailandia/etnologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thai massage is a highly gendered and culturally specific occupation. Many female Thai masseuses migrate to Norway as marriage migrants and as such are entitled to the same public healthcare as Norwegian citizens. Additionally, anyone who is not fluent in Norwegian is entitled to have an interpreter provided by the public healthcare system. Norway and most other countries aspire to universal health coverage, but certain immigrant populations continue to experience difficulties accessing appropriate healthcare. This study examined healthcare access among Thai migrant masseuses in Oslo. METHODS: Guided by access to healthcare theory, we conducted a qualitative exploratory study in 2018 with Thai women working as masseuses in Oslo, Norway. Through semi-structured in-depth interviews with 14 Thai women, we explored access to healthcare, health system navigation and care experiences. We analyzed the data using thematic analysis and grouped the information into themes relevant to healthcare access. RESULTS: Participants did not perceive that their occupation limited their access to healthcare. Most of the barriers participants experienced when accessing care were related to persistent language challenges. Women who presented at healthcare facilities with their Norwegian spouse were rarely offered interpreters, despite their husband's limited capacity to translate effectively. Cultural values inhibit women from demanding the interpretation services to which they are entitled. In seeking healthcare, women sought information about health services from their Thai network and relied on family members, friends and contacts to act as informal interpreters. Some addressed their healthcare needs through self-treatment using imported medication or sought healthcare abroad. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having the same entitlements to public healthcare as Norwegian citizens, Thai migrants experience difficulties accessing healthcare due to pervasive language barriers. A significant gap exists between the official policy that professional interpreters should be provided and the reality experienced by study participants. To improve communication and equitable access to healthcare for Thai immigrant women in Norway, health personnel should offer professional interpreters and not rely on Norwegian spouses to translate. Use of community health workers and outreach through Thai networks, may also improve Thai immigrants' knowledge and ability to navigate the Norwegian healthcare system.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Emigrantes e Inmigrantes , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Masaje , Ocupaciones , Adulto , Barreras de Comunicación , Femenino , Humanos , Noruega/epidemiología , Derechos del Paciente , Investigación Cualitativa , TailandiaRESUMEN
One of the most important gatherings of the world's economic leaders, the G20 Summit and ministerial meetings, takes place in June, 2019. The Summit presents a valuable opportunity to reflect on the provision and receipt of development assistance for health (DAH) and the role the G20 can have in shaping the future of health financing. The participants at the G20 Summit (ie, the world's largest providers of DAH, emerging donors, and DAH recipients) and this Summit's particular focus on global health and the Sustainable Development Goals offers a unique forum to consider the changing DAH context and its pressing questions. In this Health Policy perspective, we examined trends in DAH and its evolution over time, with a particular focus on G20 countries; pointed to persistent and emerging challenges for discussion at the G20 Summit; and highlighted key questions for G20 leaders to address to put the future of DAH on course to meet the expansive Sustainable Development Goals. Key questions include how to best focus DAH for equitable health gains, how to deliver DAH to strengthen health systems, and how to support domestic resource mobilisation and transformative partnerships for sustainable impact. These issues are discussed in the context of the growing effects of climate change, demographic and epidemiological transitions, and a global political shift towards increasing prioritisation of national interests. Although not all these questions are new, novel approaches to allocating DAH that prioritise equity, efficiency, and sustainability, particularly through domestic resource use and mobilisation are needed. Wrestling with difficult questions in a changing landscape is essential to develop a DAH financing system capable of supporting and sustaining crucial global health goals.