Analysing public sector institutional capacity for health workforce governance in the South-East Asia region of WHO.

BACKGROUND: In order to analyse the institutional capacity for health workforce policy development and implementation in countries in the South-East Asia region, the WHO facilitated a cross-sectional analysis of functions performed, structure, personnel, management and information systems of human resources for health (HRH) units in Ministries of Health. CASE PRESENTATION: A self-assessment survey on the characteristics and roles of HRH units was administered to relevant Government officials; the responses were validated through face-to-face workshops and by the WHO staff. Findings were tabulated to produce frequency distributions of the variables examined, and qualitative elements categorized according to a framework for capacity building in the health sector. Ten countries out of the 11 in the region responded to the survey. Seven out of 10 reported having an HRH unit, though their scope, roles, capacity and size displayed considerable variability. Some functions (such as planning and health workforce data management) were reportedly carried out in all countries, while others (inter-sectoral coordination, research, labour relations) were only performed in few. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The strengthening of the HRH governance capacity in countries should follow a logical hierarchy, identifying first and foremost the essential functions that the public sector is expected to perform to optimize HRH governance. The definition of expected roles and functions will in turn allow identifying the upstream system-wide factors and the downstream capacity requirements for the strengthening of the HRH units. The focus should ultimately be on ensuring that all the key strategic functions are performed to quality standards, irrespective of institutional arrangements.

Maternal anemia and risk of adverse birth and health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is a leading cause of maternal deaths and adverse pregnancy outcomes in developing countries. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled prevalence of anemia, the association between maternal anemia and pregnancy outcomes, and the population-attributable fraction (PAF) of these outcomes that are due to anemia in low- and middle-income countries. DESIGN: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the British Nursing Index were searched from inception to May 2015 to identify cohort studies of the association between maternal anemia and pregnancy outcomes. The anemic group was defined as having hemoglobin concentrations <10 or <11 g/dL or hematocrit values <33% or <34% depending on the study. A metaregression and stratified analysis were performed to assess the effects of study and participant characteristics on adverse pregnancy risk. The pooled prevalence of anemia in pregnant women by region and country-income category was calculated with the use of a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 8182 articles reviewed, 29 studies were included in the systematic review, and 26 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, 42.7% (95% CI: 37.0%, 48.4%) of women experienced anemia during pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries. There were significantly higher risks of low birth weight (RR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.51), preterm birth (RR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.33, 2.01), perinatal mortality (RR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.30, 1.76), and neonatal mortality (RR: 2.72; 95% CI: 1.19, 6.25) in pregnant women with anemia. South Asian, African, and low-income countries had a higher pooled anemia prevalence than did other Asian and upper-middle-income countries. Overall, in low- and middle-income countries, 12% of low birth weight, 19% of preterm births, and 18% of perinatal mortality were attributable to maternal anemia. The proportion of adverse pregnancy outcomes attributable to anemia was higher in low-income countries and in the South Asian region. CONCLUSION: Maternal anemia remains a significant health problem in low- and middle-income countries.

An assessment of the characteristics and quality of diagnostic accuracy studies for positron emission tomography conducted in Japan: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Systematic evaluations of the diagnostic accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging have been widely conducted in many countries. Although Japan's total number of PET units is the second highest in the world, very limited effort has been made to systematically assess the methodological quality of PET studies in Japan. We performed a systematic review to assess the characteristics and quality of PET diagnostic accuracy studies conducted in Japan and to analyze the factors related to their quality. METHODS: All PET studies conducted in Japan were identified using MEDLINE and the Japan Medical Abstract Society Database. The characteristics of the Japanese studies were examined and their methodological quality evaluated by the standardized quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS) tool. We compared the quality of studies indexed in MEDLINE with non-indexed studies, followed by a comparison of the studies' conclusions with those of international health technology assessment (HTA) reports. RESULTS: A total of 138 studies were identified. Half of them were not indexed in MEDLINE. The mean quality score of the Japanese studies was 6.7 and the proportion of high-quality studies (with a quality score higher than 8) was 32.6%. A significant difference was observed in several quality items between MEDLINE-indexed and non-indexed studies, although there was no difference in total quality score. Three variables (i.e., target diseases, publication year, and study type) were identified as factors related to the quality of the studies. Conclusions of Japanese studies relating to several target diseases were relatively consistent with international assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Although a considerable number of diagnostic accuracy studies of PET have been conducted in Japan, a substantial proportion of high-quality studies were not indexed in international databases. High-quality Japanese studies, therefore, should be searched using Japanese databases and assessed by systematic reviews and HTA conducted internationally.

Effectiveness of community-based health services by nurse practitioners: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: To realise universal health coverage in an ageing society, adequate provision of appropriately trained human resources is essential. The nurse practitioner (NP) is an autonomous and independent, advanced practice nurse capable of providing treatment and care that can be substituted for some aspects of a medical doctor's (MD's) role, especially in a community setting. Previous systematic reviews found higher levels of patient satisfaction with services provided by NPs than those provided by MDs. As non-communicable diseases become a major health burden requiring long-term healthcare in community settings, this systematic review aims to assess the equivalence of NP services to standard care provided by MDs, and to determine whether their practice is an effective alternative to that of MDs in community settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs will be searched in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the British Nursing Index. We will assess patient and health system utilisation outcomes of interventions comparing treatment and care provided by NPs in community settings with that provided by MDs. Two authors will independently screen studies for inclusion, consulting with a third author where necessary to resolve discrepancies. The risk of bias of included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool, and quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. Meta-analysis of included studies will be conducted using fixed-effect or random-effects models depending on the degree of between-study heterogeneity. Results will be presented using risk ratios with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean differences with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol does not require ethical approval. We will disseminate the findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis via publications in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPEROCRD42014009627.