Service readiness for the management of non-communicable diseases in publicly financed facilities in Malawi: findings from the 2019 Harmonised Health Facility Assessment census survey.

INTRODUCTION: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are rising in low-income and middle-income countries, including Malawi. To inform policy-makers and planners on the preparedness of the Malawian healthcare system to respond to NCDs, we estimated NCD service readiness in publicly financed healthcare facilities in Malawi. METHODS: We analysed data from 564 facilities surveyed in the 2019 Harmonised Health Facility Assessment, including 512 primary healthcare (PHC) and 52 secondary and tertiary care (STC) facilities. To characterise service readiness, applying the law of minimum, we estimated the percentage of facilities with functional equipment and unexpired medicines required to provide NCD services. Further, we estimated permanently unavailable items to identify service readiness bottlenecks. RESULTS: Fewer than 40% of PHC facilities were ready to deliver services for each of the 14 NCDs analysed. Insulin and beclomethasone inhalers had the lowest stock levels at PHC facilities (6% and 8%, respectively). Only 17% of rural and community hospitals (RCHs) have liver and kidney diagnostics. STC facilities had varying service readiness, ranging from 27% for managing acute diabetes complications to 94% for chronic type 2 diabetes management. Only 38% of STC facilities were ready to manage chronic heart failure. Oral pain medicines were widely available at all levels of health facilities; however, only 22% of RCHs and 29% of STCs had injectable morphine or pethidine. Beclomethasone was never available at 74% of PHC and 29% of STC facilities. CONCLUSION: Publicly financed facilities in Malawi are generally unprepared to provide NCD services, especially at the PHC level. Targeted investments in PHC can substantially improve service readiness for chronic NCD conditions in local communities and enable STC to respond to acute NCD complications and more complex NCD cases.

The Role of HTA for Essential Health Benefit Package Design in Low or Middle-Income Countries.

This Commentary explores the relationship between Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Health Benefits Package (HBP) design to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in low- and middle-income countries. It emphasizes that while HTA evaluates individual healthcare interventions, HBP reform aims to create comprehensive service sets considering overall population health needs and available resources. Challenges in LMICs include limited local data and technical capacity, leading to reliance on cost-effectiveness estimates from other settings. We suggest a practical approach by combining HTA and HBP elements through a hybrid or compartmentalized method. This approach sets differentiated cost-effectiveness thresholds for specific healthcare platforms or programs (e.g., primary care or essential surgery), aligning priority-setting with organizational considerations, ethics, and implementation strategies. Strong institutions and academic support are vital for evidence-informed priority-setting processes. In summary, HTA can play a pivotal role in designing HBPs for UHC in LMICs, and a compartmentalized approach can enhance priority-setting while considering budget constraints and equity.

Burden of disease and barriers to comprehensive care for rheumatic heart disease in South Africa: an updated systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is responsible for a significant burden of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and remains the most common cause of acquired heart disease among children and young adults in low-income and middle-income countries. Additionally, the global COVID-19 pandemic has forced the emergency restructuring of many health systems, which has had a broad impact on health in general, including cardiovascular disease. Despite significant cost to the health system and estimates from 2015 indicating both high incidence and prevalence of RHD in South Africa, no cohesive national strategy exists. An updated review of national burden of disease estimates, as well as literature on barriers to care for patients with RHD, will provide crucial information to assist in the development of a national RHD programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using predefined search terms that capture relevant disease processes from Group A Streptococcal (GAS) infection through to the sequelae of RHD, a search of PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Sabinet African Journals, SA Heart and Current and Completed Research databases will be performed. All eligible studies on RHD, acute rheumatic fever and GAS infection published from April 2014 to December 2022 will be included. Vital registration data for the same period from Statistics South Africa will also be collected. A standardised data extraction form will be used to capture results for both quantitative and qualitative analyses. All studies included in burden of disease estimates will undergo quality assessment using standardised tools. Updated estimates on mortality and morbidity as well as a synthesis of work on primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of RHD will be reported. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics clearance is required for this study. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and submitted to national stakeholders in RHD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023392782.

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries.

Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average

En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de

Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries

[ABSTRACT]. Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in lowand middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.

[RESUMEN]. En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.

[RESUMO]. Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries / Argumentos de la economía de la salud para ampliar las medidas de control de la hipertensión de la iniciativa HEARTS de la OMS en los países de ingresos medianos y bajos / Ampliação do pacote de controle da hipertensão OMS-HEARTS em países de baixa e média renda: argumentos a partir da perspectiva da economia em saúde

ABSTRACT Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.

RESUMEN En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.

RESUMO Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.

Balancing health and financial protection in health benefit package design.

Policymakers face difficult choices over which health interventions to publicly finance. We developed an approach to health benefits package design that accommodates explicit tradeoffs between improvements in health and provision of financial risk protection (FRP). We designed a mathematical optimization model to balance gains in health and FRP across candidate interventions when publicly financed. The optimal subset of interventions selected for inclusion was determined with bi-criterion integer programming conditional on a budget constraint. The optimal set of interventions to publicly finance in a health benefits package varied according to whether the objective for optimization was population health benefits or FRP. When both objectives were considered jointly, the resulting optimal essential benefits package depended on the weights placed on the two objectives. In the Sustainable Development Goals era, smart spending toward universal health coverage is essential. Mathematical optimization provides a quantitative framework for policymakers to design health policies and select interventions that jointly prioritize multiple objectives with explicit financial constraints.

Household Economic Consequences of Rheumatic Heart Disease in Uganda.

Background: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) has declined dramatically in wealthier countries in the past three decades, but it remains endemic in many lower-resourced regions and can have significant costs to households. The objective of this study was to quantify the economic burden of RHD among Ugandans affected by RHD. Methods: This was a cross-sectional cost-of-illness study that randomly sampled 87 participants and their households from the Uganda National RHD registry between December 2018 and February 2020. Using a standardized survey instrument, we asked participants and household members about outpatient and inpatient RHD costs and financial coping mechanisms incurred over the past 12 months. We used descriptive statistics to analyze levels and distributions of costs and the frequency of coping strategies. Multivariate Poisson regression models were used to assess relationships between socioeconomic characteristics and utilization of financial coping mechanisms. Results: Most participants were young or women, demonstrating a wide variation in socioeconomic status. Outpatient and inpatient costs were primarily driven by transportation, medications, and laboratory tests, with overall RHD direct and indirect costs of $78 per person-year. Between 20 and 35 percent of households experienced catastrophic healthcare expenditure, with participants in the Northern and Western Regions 5-10 times more likely to experience such hardship and utilize financial coping mechanisms than counterparts in the Central Region, a wealthier area. Increases in total RHD costs were positively correlated with increasing use of coping behaviors. Conclusion: Ugandan households affected by RHD, particularly in lower-income areas, incur out-of-pocket costs that are very high relative to income, exacerbating the poverty trap. Universal health coverage policy reforms in Uganda should include mechanisms to reduce or eliminate out-of-pocket expenditures for RHD and other chronic diseases.

Health system costs of rheumatic heart disease care in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) is a disease of poverty that is neglected in developing countries, including South Africa. Lack of adequate evidence regarding the cost of RHD care has hindered national and international actions to prevent RHD related deaths. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost of RHD-related health services in a tertiary hospital in the Western Cape, South Africa. METHODS: The primary data on service utilisation were collected from a randomly selected sample of 100 patient medical records from the Global Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry (the REMEDY study) - a registry of individuals living with RHD. Patient-level clinical data, including, prices and quantities of medications and laboratory tests, were collected from the main tertiary hospital providing RHD care. All annual costs from a health system perspective were estimated in 2017 (base year) in South African Rand (ZAR) using a combination of ingredients and step-down costing approaches and later converted to United States dollars (USD). Step-down costing was used to estimate provider time costs and all other facility costs such as overheads. A 3% discount rate was also employed in order to allow depreciation and opportunity cost. We aggregated data to estimate the total annual costs and the average annual per-patient cost of RHD and conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The estimated total cost of RHD care at the tertiary hospital was USD 2 million (in 2017 USD) for the year 2017, with surgery costs accounting for 65%. Per-patient, average annual costs were USD 3900. For the subset of costs estimated using the ingredients approach, outpatient medications, and consumables related to cardiac catheterisation and heart valve surgery were the main cost drivers. CONCLUSIONS: RHD-related healthcare consumes significant tertiary hospital resources in South Africa, with annual per-patient costs higher than many other non-communicable and infectious diseases. This analysis supports the scaling up of primary and secondary prevention programmes at primary health centers in order to reduce future tertiary care costs. The study could also inform resource allocation efforts and provide cost estimates for future studies of intervention cost-effectiveness.

An investment case for the prevention and management of rheumatic heart disease in the African Union 2021-30: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Despite declines in deaths from rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in Africa over the past 30 years, it remains a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality on the continent. We present an investment case for interventions to prevent and manage RHD in the African Union (AU). METHODS: We created a cohort state-transition model to estimate key outcomes in the disease process, including cases of pharyngitis from group A streptococcus, episodes of acute rheumatic fever (ARF), cases of RHD, heart failure, and deaths. With this model, we estimated the impact of scaling up interventions using estimates of effect sizes from published studies. We estimated the cost to scale up coverage of interventions and summarised the benefits by monetising health gains estimated in the model using a full income approach. Costs and benefits were compared using the benefit-cost ratio and the net benefits with discounted costs and benefits. FINDINGS: Operationally achievable levels of scale-up of interventions along the disease spectrum, including primary prevention, secondary prevention, platforms for management of heart failure, and heart valve surgery could avert 74 000 (UI 50 000-104 000) deaths from RHD and ARF from 2021 to 2030 in the AU, reaching a 30·7% (21·6-39·0) reduction in the age-standardised death rate from RHD in 2030, compared with no increase in coverage of interventions. The estimated benefit-cost ratio for plausible scale-up of secondary prevention and secondary and tertiary care interventions was 4·7 (2·9-6·3) with a net benefit of $2·8 billion (1·6-3·9; 2019 US$) through 2030. The estimated benefit-cost ratio for primary prevention scale-up was low to 2030 (0·2, <0·1-0·4), increasing with delayed benefits accrued to 2090. The benefit-cost dynamics of primary prevention were sensitive to the costs of different delivery approaches, uncertain epidemiological parameters regarding group A streptococcal pharyngitis and ARF, assumptions about long-term demographic and economic trends, and discounting. INTERPRETATION: Increased coverage of interventions to control and manage RHD could accelerate progress towards eradication in AU member states. Gaps in local epidemiological data and particular components of the disease process create uncertainty around the level of benefits. In the short term, costs of secondary prevention and secondary and tertiary care for RHD are lower than for primary prevention, and benefits accrue earlier. FUNDING: World Heart Federation, Leona M and Harry B Helmsley Charitable Trust, and American Heart Association.

Economic consequences of rheumatic heart disease: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) remains endemic in less-resourced regions and countries and results in high medical and non-medical costs to households, health systems, and society. This scoping review maps out the available evidence on the economic impact of RHD and its antecedents and suggests future research priorities. METHOD: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. We identified articles through systematic electronic database search supplemented by expert knowledge of unpublished literature. Studies were included if they collected empirical RHD-related costing data as a primary or secondary objective and if the data were collected from 2000 onward. Main quantitative findings by intervention, costing perspective, and location were charted, and a standardized quality assessment tool was used to appraise included studies. RESULTS: The index search identified 2519 electronic records and two grey-literature graduate theses. Six full texts were included in the review. Primary prevention costs were modest, while secondary and especially tertiary prevention were more costly. Most estimates were of health sector costs and for tertiary interventions. Only two studies described RHD-related costs in non-high-income countries. Most studies were of adequate methodological quality. CONCLUSION: Research into the costs of RHD has mostly been done in wealthy countries. Costs from the household perspective, which are particularly important in countries with limited public healthcare finance, are lacking. To inform advocacy and guide implementation of the 2018 World Health Assembly resolution on RHD, high-quality, local cost estimates will be needed from a range of representative, RHD-endemic countries.

Proactive prevention: Act now to disrupt the impending non-communicable disease crisis in low-burden populations.

Non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention efforts have traditionally targeted high-risk and high-burden populations. We propose an alteration in prevention efforts to also include emphasis and focus on low-risk populations, predominantly younger individuals and low-prevalence populations. We refer to this approach as "proactive prevention." This emphasis is based on the priority to put in place policies, programs, and infrastructure that can disrupt the epidemiological transition to develop NCDs among these groups, thereby averting future NCD crises. Proactive prevention strategies can be classified, and their implementation prioritized, based on a 2-dimensional assessment: impact and feasibility. Thus, potential interventions can be categorized into a 2-by-2 matrix: high impact/high feasibility, high impact/low feasibility, low impact/high feasibility, and low impact/low feasibility. We propose that high impact/high feasibility interventions are ready to be implemented (act), while high impact/low feasibility interventions require efforts to foster buy-in first. Low impact/high feasibility interventions need to be changed to improve their impact while low impact/low feasibility might be best re-designed in the context of limited resources. Using this framework, policy makers, public health experts, and other stakeholders can more effectively prioritize and leverage limited resources in an effort to slow or prevent the evolving global NCD crisis.

The American Heart Association's Call to Action for Reducing the Global Burden of Rheumatic Heart Disease: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association.

Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) affects ≈40 million people and claims nearly 300 000 lives each year. The historic passing of a World Health Assembly resolution on RHD in 2018 now mandates a coordinated global response. The American Heart Association is committed to serving as a global champion and leader in RHD care and prevention. Here, we pledge support in 5 key areas: (1) professional healthcare worker education and training, (2) technical support for the implementation of evidence-based strategies for rheumatic fever/RHD prevention, (3) access to essential medications and technologies, (4) research, and (5) advocacy to increase global awareness, resources, and capacity for RHD control. In bolstering the efforts of the American Heart Association to combat RHD, we hope to inspire others to collaborate, communicate, and contribute.

Resource requirements for essential universal health coverage: a modelling study based on findings from Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition.

BACKGROUND: Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition (DCP3), published two model health benefits packages (HBPs). This study estimates the overall costs and individual component costs of these packages in low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (lower-MICs). METHODS: This study reports on our Disease Control Priorities Cost Model (DCP-CM), developed as part of the DCP3 project to determine the overall costs of the 218 health sector interventions recommended in the model HBP termed essential universal health coverage (EUHC). Model inputs included data on intervention unit costs, demographic and epidemiological data to quantify the populations in need of specific interventions, baseline coverage indicators, and estimates of required health system costs to support direct service delivery. The DCP-CM was informed primarily by published estimates of economic costs of interventions measured from the health system perspective. We estimated counterfactual annual costs for the year 2015. We disaggregated costs according to intervention characteristics (delivery platform, delivery timing, and health system objective) and did one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses with determination of 95% credible intervals (Crls). FINDINGS: At 80% population coverage, the annual cost of EUHC would be US$79 (95% Crl 60-110) per capita (in 2016 US dollars) in LICs and US$130 (100-180) per capita in lower-MICs. As a share of 2015 gross national income (GNI), additional investments would require 8·0% (95% Crl 5·7-11·3) in LICs and 4·2% (2·9-5·9) in lower-MICs. A highest priority subpackage comprising 115 of the EUHC interventions would cost approximately half of these amounts (3·7% [2·6-5·3] of 2015 GNI in LICs and 2·0% [1·4-2·8] in lower-MICs). Mortality-reducing interventions would require around two-thirds of the overall package costs, with interventions to reduce mortality at age 5-69 years from non-communicable disease and injury comprising the highest share of total EUHC costs in both income groups (37·6% [37·2-37·9] in LICs and 43·0% [42·6-43·4] in lower-MICs). Interventions addressing chronic health conditions (requiring 45·5% [44·8-46·4] 2015 GNI for LICs and lower-MICs combined) and interventions delivered in health centres (requiring 49·8% [49·5-50·2] 2015 GNI for LICs and lower-MICs combined) would each comprise the plurality of costs. INTERPRETATION: Implementation of EUHC would require costly investment, especially in LICs. DCP-CM is available as an online tool that can inform local HBP deliberation and support efficient investment in UHC, especially as countries pivot towards non-communicable disease and injury care. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Trond Mohn Foundation, and Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Making cardiac surgery feasible in African countries: Experience from Namibia, Uganda, and Zambia.

OBJECTIVES: Few African countries have the resources to provide optimal cardiac surgery care. We explored needs at cardiac surgery centers in Namibia, Zambia, and Uganda. Our objectives were (1) to determine the key variables to be included in a cardiac surgery needs assessment tool and (2) to highlight the current initiatives, challenges and opportunities, and future goals for cardiac surgery in these 3 countries. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with stakeholders in each country as well as surveys of surgical facilities. We synthesized our findings using a health systems conceptual framework. Each program's current capacity was compared with a standardized definition of "adequate" surgical capacity. On the basis of these findings, we developed a formal needs assessment questionnaire for use in resource-constrained countries. RESULTS: Although each of these countries has adequate facilities and surgical expertise, they still lack key support staff and material resources. Training and mentorship programs are being built, and the sites participate in cardiovascular research. Yet a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach-including palliative care and rehabilitation-is lacking, and patients in remote areas are not being served. These observations allowed us to define the variables in our needs assessment tool. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the great potential that exists to expand cardiac surgery in Africa and highlights some of the major resource bottlenecks that may hinder the scale-up of surgical programs. Our needs assessment questionnaire will assist ministries of health in building sustainable cardiac surgery programs using innovative Afro-centric solutions.

Task sharing to improve the prevention, diagnosis and management of rheumatic heart disease: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) remains an important cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality globally due to weak health systems in many countries. RHD can be effectively prevented and managed; however, RHD-related interventions have not been widely adopted in countries with severe human resource constraints. Task sharing is a recognised approach to personnel shortages that could prove effective for RHD and has, anecdotally, been attempted in a few settings. We propose a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol to assess models that use non-physician workers to expand access to, and quality of, RHD-related healthcare. METHODS: We will include randomised controlled trials (RCT), cluster RCTs, quasi-experimental and controlled before and after studies providing information on the effectiveness of non-physician workers in providing care for streptoccocal pharyngitis, rheumatic fever and RHD. We will search relevant electronic databases and grey literature using medical subject headings. Standardised data extraction forms will be used to collect effect sizes that will be pooled in random-effects models. We will also conduct subgroup analyses and note other important quantitative findings, such as cost reduction, and qualitative findings, such as patient satisfaction. We will also assess study quality and risk of bias and metabias. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this systematic review of previously published literature. The results of the systematic review will be broadly disseminated via conference presentations, multidisciplinary workshops and peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017072989.