Evaluation of the Primary Health Care policy in the Maghreb. Feedback from Expert-Leaders in Tunisia.

INTRODUCTION: The Basic Health Care Policy (BHC), the Maghrebian version of WHO's Primary Health Care, is celebrating forty years in Tunisia. The aim of this paper was to contribute to the evaluation of BHCs in Tunisia, by listening to the testimonies of experts / leaders who have led their journey during these four decades. METHODS: The experts / leaders included in this testimony were invited via email and throu gh the use of the Delphi technique to report the acquired lessons and the errors. The collected qualitative data was analyzed through a process of categorization which classified them into: assets (strengths and opportunities) and handicaps (weaknesses and threats). RESULTS: Four experts / leaders took part in this call for testimonies, including two consultants to international organizations, a trade union doctor and a professor of Preventive Medicine. The main assets of the BHC in Tunisia, according to the participants, were: 1. The medical leadership initiated from the student phase;  2. The political commitment of public authorities ; 3. The academic support from the medical faculties and their Preventive Medicine departments ; 4. The institutionalization of the organizational framework of the Health Unit ; 5. The Academic training of professionals in integrated medicine. As for the handicaps of BHC in Tunisia, the experts / leaders particularly mentioned: 1. The weakness of community participation ; 2. The international attractiveness of accompanying national doctors; 3. The pressures of academic career imperatives ; 4. The lack of a National School of Public Health; 5. The context of privatization and hospital-centrism. CONCLUSION: This feedback from the experts / leaders concerning BHC policies in Tunisia highlighted the perception of its performance "in tune" with WHO and "three years before Alma Ata". The new generation of BHC leaders have an obligation to safeguard their principles and adapt their practices to population expectations and new managerial approaches.

The path towards universal health coverage in the Arab uprising countries Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen.

The constitutions of many countries in the Arab world clearly highlight the role of governments in guaranteeing provision of health care as a right for all citizens. However, citizens still have inequitable health-care systems. One component of such inequity relates to restricted financial access to health-care services. The recent uprisings in the Arab world, commonly referred to as the Arab spring, created a sociopolitical momentum that should be used to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). At present, many countries of the Arab spring are considering health coverage as a priority in dialogues for new constitutions and national policy agendas. UHC is also the focus of advocacy campaigns of a number of non-governmental organisations and media outlets. As part of the health in the Arab world Series in The Lancet, this report has three overarching objectives. First, we present selected experiences of other countries that had similar social and political changes, and how these events affected their path towards UHC. Second, we present a brief overview of the development of health-care systems in the Arab world with regard to health-care coverage and financing, with a focus on Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Yemen. Third, we aim to integrate historical lessons with present contexts in a roadmap for action that addresses the challenges and opportunities for progression towards UHC.

Assessing trade in health services in countries of the Eastern Mediterranean from a public health perspective.

SUMMARY: Assessing trade in health services (TiHS) in developing countries is challenging since the sources of information are diverse, information is not accessible and professionals lack grasp of issues. A multi-country study was conducted in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR)--Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, and Yemen. The objective was to estimate the direction, volume, and value of TiHS; analyze country commitments; and assess the challenges and opportunities for health services.Trade liberalization favored an open trade regime and encouraged foreign direct investment. Consumption abroad and movement of natural persons were the two prevalent modes. Yemen and Sudan are net importers, while Jordan promotes health tourism. In 2002, Yemenis spent US$ 80 million out of pocket for treatment abroad, while Jordan generated US$ 620 million. Egypt, Pakistan, Sudan and Tunisia export health workers, while Oman relies on import and 40% of its workforce is non-Omani. There is a general lack of coherence between Ministries of Trade and Health in formulating policies on TiHS.This is the first organized attempt to look at TiHS in the EMR. The systematic approach has helped create greater awareness, and a move towards better policy coherence in the area of trade in health services.

Framework for assessing governance of the health system in developing countries: gateway to good governance.

Governance is thought to be a key determinant of economic growth, social advancement and overall development, as well as for the attainment of the MDGs in low- and middle-income countries. Governance of the health system is the least well-understood aspect of health systems. A framework for assessing health system governance (HSG) at national and sub-national levels is presented, which has been applied in countries of the Eastern Mediterranean. In developing the HSG framework key issues considered included the role of the state vs. the market; role of the ministries of health vs. other state ministries; role of actors in governance; static vs. dynamic health systems; and health reform vs. human rights-based approach to health. Four existing frameworks were considered: World Health Organization's (WHO) domains of stewardship; Pan American Health Organization's (PAHO) essential public health functions; World Bank's six basic aspects of governance; and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) principles of good governance. The proposed HSG assessment framework includes the following 10 principles-strategic vision, participation and consensus orientation, rule of law, transparency, responsiveness, equity and inclusiveness, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability, intelligence and information, and ethics. The framework permits 'diagnoses of the ills' in HSG at the policy and operational levels and points to interventions for its improvement. In the case of Pakistan, where the framework was applied, a positive aspect was the growing participation and consensus orientation among stakeholders, while weaknesses were identified in relation to strategic vision, accountability, transparency, effectiveness and efficiency and rule of law. In using the HSG framework it needs to be recognized that the principles are value driven and not normative and are to be seen in the social and political context; and the framework relies on a qualitative approach and does not follow a scoring or ranking system. It does not directly address aid effectiveness but provides insight on the ability to utilize external resources and has the ability to include the effect of global health governance on national HSG as the subject itself gets better crystallized. The improved performance of the ministries of health and state health departments is at the heart of this framework. The framework helps raise the level of awareness among policymakers of the importance of HSG. The road to good governance in health is long and uneven. Assessing HSG is only the first step; the challenge that remains is to carry out effective governance in vastly different institutional contexts.

Contracting but not without caution: experience with outsourcing of health services in countries of the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

The public sector in developing countries is increasingly contracting with the non-state sector to improve access, efficiency and quality of health services. We conducted a multicountry study to assess the range of health services contracted out, the process of contracting and its influencing factors in ten countries of the Eastern Mediterranean Region: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Islamic Republic of Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic and Tunisia. Our results showed that Afghanistan, Egypt, Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan had experience with outsourcing of primary care services; Jordan, Lebanon and Tunisia extensively contracted out hospital and ambulatory care services; while Bahrain, Morocco and the Syrian Arab Republic outsourced mainly non-clinical services. The interest of the non-state sector in contracting was to secure a regular source of revenue and gain enhanced recognition and credibility. While most countries promoted contracting with the private sector, the legal and bureaucratic support in countries varied with the duration of experience with contracting. The inherent risks evident in the contracting process were reliance on donor funds, limited number of providers in rural areas, parties with vested interests gaining control over the contracting process, as well as poor monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Contracting provides the opportunity to have greater control over private providers in countries with poor regulatory capacity, and if used judiciously can improve health system performance.