Preparing healthcare facilities in sub-Saharan Africa for future outbreaks: insights from a multi-country digital self-assessment of COVID-19 preparedness.

BACKGROUND: Despite previous experience with epidemics, African healthcare systems were inadequately prepared and substantially impacted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Limited information about the level of COVID-19 preparedness of healthcare facilities in Africa hampers policy decision-making to fight future outbreaks in the region, while maintaining essential healthcare services running. METHODS: Between May-November 2020, we performed a survey study with SafeCare4Covid - a free digital self-assessment application - to evaluate the COVID-19 preparedness of healthcare facilities in Africa following World Health Organization guidelines. The tool assessed (i) COVID-19-related capabilities with 31 questions; and (ii) availability of essential medical supplies with a 23-supplies checklist. Tailored quality improvement plans were provided after assessments. Information about facilities' location, type, and ownership was also collected. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-one facilities in 11 African countries completed the capability assessment; 412 also completed the supplies checklist. The average capability score on a scale of 0-100 (n=471) was 58.0 (interquartile range 40.0-76.0), and the average supplies score (n=412) was 61.6 (39.0-83.0). Both scores were significantly lower in rural (capability score, mean 53.6 [95%CI:50.3-57.0]/supplies score, 59.1 [55.5-62.8]) versus urban facilities (capability score, 65.2 [61.7-68.7]/supplies score, 70.7 [67.2-74.1]) (P<0.0001 for both comparisons). Likewise, lower scores were found for public versus private clinics, and for primary healthcare centres versus hospitals. Guidelines for triage and isolation, clinical management of COVID-19, staff mental support, and contact tracing forms were largely missing. Handwashing stations were partially equipped in 33% of facilities. The most missing medical supply was COVID-19 specimen collection material (71%), while 43% of facilities did not have N95/FFP2 respirators and 19% lacked medical masks. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of public and private African facilities providing basic healthcare in rural areas, lacked fundamental COVID-19-related capabilities and life-saving personal protective equipment. Decentralization of epidemic preparedness efforts in these settings is warranted to protect healthcare workers and patients alike in future epidemics. Digital tools are of great value to timely measure and improve epidemic preparedness of healthcare facilities, inform decision-making, create a more stakeholder-broad approach and increase health-system resilience for future disease outbreaks.

Determinants and perception of health insurance participation among healthcare providers in Nigeria: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: To accelerate universal health coverage, Nigeria's National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) decentralized the implementation of government health insurance to the individual states in 2014. Lagos is one of the states that passed a State Health Insurance Scheme into law, in order to expand the benefits of health insurance beyond the few residents enrolled in community-based health insurance programs, commercial private health insurance plans or the NHIS. Public and private healthcare providers are a critical component of the Lagos State Health Scheme (LSHS) rollout. This study explored the determinants and perception of provider participation in health insurance programs including the LSHS. METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods cross sectional design. Quantitative data were collected from 60 healthcare facilities representatively sampled from 6 Local Government Areas in Lagos state. For the qualitative data, providers were interviewed using structured questionnaires on selected characteristics of each health facility in addition to the managers' opinions about the challenges and benefits of insurance participation, capacity pressure, resource availability and financial management consequences. RESULTS: A higher proportion of provider facilities participating in insurance relative to non-participating facilities were larger with mid to (very) high patient volume, workforce, and longer years of operation. In addition, a greater proportion of private facilities compared to public facilities participated in insurance. Furthermore, a higher proportion of secondary and tertiary facilities relative to primary facilities participated in insurance. Lastly, increase in patient volume and revenue were motivating factors for provider facilities to participate in insurance, while low tariffs, delay and denial of payments, and patients' unrealistic expectations were mentioned as inhibiting factors. CONCLUSION: For the Lagos state and other government insurance schemes in developing countries to be successful, effective contracting and quality assurance of healthcare providers are essential. The health facilities indicated that these would require adequate and regular provider payment, investments in infrastructure upgrades and educating the public about insurance benefit plans and service expectations.