Economic analysis of a health system strengthening program in the Democratic Republic of the Congo / Analyse économique d'un programme de renforcement du système de santé en République démocratique du Congo.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the Democratic Republic of the Congo's (DRC) precarious health system that provides only limited access to health care, the European Union, via Memisa Belgium, implemented a program to strengthen provision of and access to health care (known as PRO DS) in the provinces of Kongo Central and Ituri. This program took a holistic approach, seeking to improve equitable access and combat malnutrition. METHODS: To measure the program's social return on investment and to estimate the cost per capita and effectiveness per euro invested (efficiency), a 61-month (1 July 2017 to 31 July 2022) cost-effectiveness evaluation with a societal perspective was carried out. The double-difference method was used to compare the results of PRO DS and non-PRO DS zones. The social return on investment was assessed via the ratio of effectiveness to costs. RESULTS: Analyses revealed the program cost between 3.72 and 3.96 euros per capita per year (2022) in Kongo Central, and between 3.12 and 3.36 euros in Ituri. Importantly, it was cost-effective in the areas of reproductive health, nutrition, and the use of health and nutrition services. CONCLUSIONS: The program's strong nutritional component and overall holistic vision may explain why it was so efficient. PRO DS stands out from other programs that focus solely on one specific problem or population. Although the program has some limitations, it would be worthwhile for the government to invest in it.

Introduction: Face à l'accès limité aux soins et à la précarité des structures sanitaires en République démocratique du Congo, l'Union européenne par l'intermédiaire de Memisa Belgique avait mis en œuvre le Programme de renforcement de l'offre et développement de l'accès aux soins de santé (PRO DS) dans les provinces du Kongo-Central et de l'Ituri. Ce programme se caractérisait par une approche holistique d'équité d'accès et de lutte contre la malnutrition. Méthodes: Pour mesurer le retour social sur investissement du programme et estimer son coût par habitant et son efficacité par euros investis (efficience), une évaluation coûts-efficacité avec une perspective sociétale de 61 mois (1er juillet 2017 au 31 juillet 2022) a été réalisée. La méthode de double différence, qui compare les résultats des zones PRO DS et des zones non PRO DS, a été utilisée. Le retour social sur investissement a été évalué par le biais du rapport entre l'efficacité et les coûts. Résultats: Les analyses ont montré que le programme coûtait par année et par habitant entre 3,72 et 3,96 euros (2022) au Kongo-Central, et entre 3,12 et 3,36 euros en Ituri. De plus, il était coût-efficace dans plusieurs domaines, telles la santé de la reproduction, la nutrition, l'utilisation des services de santé et nutritionnels. Conclusions: L'efficience du programme pourrait s'expliquer par sa vision holistique avec un fort volet « Nutrition ¼. PRO DS se démarque d'autres programmes qui agissent uniquement sur une problématique ou population spécifique. Malgré ses quelques imperfections, le gouvernement mériterait d'y investir.

Identifying indicators sensitive to primary healthcare nurse practitioner practice: a review of systematic reviews protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Primary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs) practice in a wide range of clinical settings and with diverse patient populations. Several systematic reviews have examined outcomes of PHCNP roles. However, there is a lack of consistency in the definitions used for the PHCNP role across the reviews. The identification of indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice from the perspective of patients, providers and the healthcare system will allow researchers, clinicians and decision-makers to understand how these providers contribute to outcomes of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A review of systematic reviews is proposed to describe the current state of knowledge about indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice using recognised role definitions. Outcomes of interest include any outcome indicator measuring the effectiveness of PHCNPs. We will limit our search to 2010 onwards to capture the most up-to-date trends. The following electronic databases will be searched: Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, EMBASE, Global Health, Health Economics Evaluation Database, Health Evidence, HealthStar, Health Systems Evidence, Joanna Briggs Institute, Medline, PDQ-Evidence, PubMed and Web of Science. The search strategies will be reviewed by an academic librarian. Reference lists of all relevant publications will be reviewed. Grey literature will be searched from 2010 onwards, and will include: CADTH Information Services, CADTH's Grey Matters tool, OpenGrey, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses and WHO. The PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews will be searched to identify registered review protocols. The review protocol was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols recommendations. A narrative synthesis will be used to summarise study findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required for the study. The data used in the study will be abstracted from published systematic reviews. Dissemination strategies will include peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations and presentations to key stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020198182.

Case management and self-management support for frequent users with chronic disease in primary care: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases represent a major challenge for health care and social services. A number of people with chronic diseases require more services due to characteristics that increase their vulnerability. Given the burden of increasingly vulnerable patients on primary care, a pragmatic intervention in four Family Medicine Groups (primary care practices in Quebec, Canada) has been proposed for individuals with chronic diseases (diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, musculoskeletal diseases and/or chronic pain) who are frequent users of hospital services. The intervention combines case management by a nurse with group support meetings encouraging self-management based on the Stanford Chronic Disease Self-Management Program. The goals of this study are to: (1) analyze the implementation of the intervention in the participating practices in order to determine how the various contexts have influenced the implementation and the observed effects; (2) evaluate the proximal (self-efficacy, self-management, health habits, activation and psychological distress) and intermediate (empowerment, quality of life and health care use) effects of the intervention on patients; (3) conduct an economic analysis of the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: The analysis of the implementation will be conducted using realistic evaluation and participatory approaches within four categories of stakeholders (Family Medicine Group and health centre management, Family Medicine Group practitioners, patients and their families, health centre or community partners). The data will be obtained through individual and group interviews, project documentation reviews and by documenting the intervention. Evaluation of the effects on patients will be based on a pragmatic randomized before-after experimental design with a delayed intervention control group (six months). Economic analysis will include cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis. DISCUSSION: The integration of a case management intervention delivered by nurses and self-management group support into primary care practices has the potential to positively impact patient empowerment and quality of life and hopefully reduce the burden on health care. Decision-makers, managers and health care professionals will be aware of the factors to consider in promoting the implementation of this intervention into other primary care practices in the region and elsewhere. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01719991.