The My Child Matters programme: effect of public-private partnerships on paediatric cancer care in low-income and middle-income countries.

In low-income and middle-income countries, an excess in treatment failure for children with cancer usually results from misdiagnosis, inadequate access to treatment, death from toxicity, treatment abandonment, and relapse. The My Child Matters programme of the Sanofi Espoir Foundation has funded 55 paediatric cancer projects in low-income and middle-income countries over 10 years. We assessed the impact of the projects in these regions by using baseline assessments that were done in 2006. Based on these data, estimated 5-year survival in 2016 increased by a median of 5·1%, ranging from -1·5% in Venezuela to 17·5% in Ukraine. Of the 26 861 children per year who develop cancer in the ten index countries with My Child Matters projects that were evaluated in 2006, an estimated additional 1343 children can now expect an increase in survival outcome. For example, in Paraguay, a network of paediatric oncology satellite clinics was established and scaled up to a national level and has managed 884 patients since initiation in 2006. Additionally, the African Retinoblastoma Network was scaled up from a demonstration project in Mali to a network of retinoblastoma referral centres in five sub-Saharan African countries, and the African School of Paediatric Oncology has trained 42 physicians and 100 nurses from 16 countries. The My Child Matters programme has catalysed improvements in cancer care and has complemented the efforts of government, civil society, and the private sector to sustain and scale improvements in health care to a national level. Key elements of successful interventions include strong and sustained local leadership, community engagement, international engagement, and capacity building and support from government.

Improving rational use of ACTs through diagnosis-dependent subsidies: Evidence from a cluster-randomized controlled trial in western Kenya.

BACKGROUND: More than half of artemisinin combination therapies (ACTs) consumed globally are dispensed in the retail sector, where diagnostic testing is uncommon, leading to overconsumption and poor targeting. In many malaria-endemic countries, ACTs sold over the counter are available at heavily subsidized prices, further contributing to their misuse. Inappropriate use of ACTs can have serious implications for the spread of drug resistance and leads to poor outcomes for nonmalaria patients treated with incorrect drugs. We evaluated the public health impact of an innovative strategy that targets ACT subsidies to confirmed malaria cases by coupling free diagnostic testing with a diagnosis-dependent ACT subsidy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 32 community clusters in western Kenya (population approximately 160,000). Eligible clusters had retail outlets selling ACTs and existing community health worker (CHW) programs and were randomly assigned 1:1 to control and intervention arms. In intervention areas, CHWs were available in their villages to perform malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) on demand for any individual >1 year of age experiencing a malaria-like illness. Malaria RDT-positive individuals received a voucher for a discount on a quality-assured ACT, redeemable at a participating retail medicine outlet. In control areas, CHWs offered a standard package of health education, prevention, and referral services. We conducted 4 population-based surveys-at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months-of a random sample of households with fever in the last 4 weeks to evaluate predefined, individual-level outcomes. The primary outcome was uptake of malaria diagnostic testing at 12 months. The main secondary outcome was rational ACT use, defined as the proportion of ACTs used by test-positive individuals. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle using generalized estimating equations (GEEs) to account for clustering with prespecified adjustment for gender, age, education, and wealth. All descriptive statistics and regressions were weighted to account for sampling design. Between July 2015 and May 2017, 32,404 participants were tested for malaria, and 10,870 vouchers were issued. A total of 7,416 randomly selected participants with recent fever from all 32 clusters were surveyed. The majority of recent fevers were in children under 18 years (62.9%, n = 4,653). The gender of enrolled participants was balanced in children (49.8%, n = 2,318 boys versus 50.2%, n = 2,335 girls), but more adult women were enrolled than men (78.0%, n = 2,139 versus 22.0%, n = 604). At baseline, 67.6% (n = 1,362) of participants took an ACT for their illness, and 40.3% (n = 810) of all participants took an ACT purchased from a retail outlet. At 12 months, 50.5% (n = 454) in the intervention arm and 43.4% (n = 389) in the control arm had a malaria diagnostic test for their recent fever (adjusted risk difference [RD] = 9 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI 2-15 pp; p = 0.015; adjusted risk ratio [RR] = 1.20; 95% CI 1.05-1.38; p = 0.015). By 18 months, the ARR had increased to 1.25 (95% CI 1.09-1.44; p = 0.005). Rational use of ACTs in the intervention area increased from 41.7% (n = 279) at baseline to 59.6% (n = 403) and was 40% higher in the intervention arm at 18 months (ARR 1.40; 95% CI 1.19-1.64; p < 0.001). While intervention effects increased between 12 and 18 months, we were not able to estimate longer-term impact of the intervention and could not independently evaluate the effects of the free testing and the voucher on uptake of testing. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis-dependent ACT subsidies and community-based interventions that include the private sector can have an important impact on diagnostic testing and population-wide rational use of ACTs. Targeting of the ACT subsidy itself to those with a positive malaria diagnostic test may also improve sustainability and reduce the cost of retail-sector ACT subsidies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02461628.

Results-based aid with lasting effects: sustainability in the Salud Mesoamérica Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The Salud Mesoamérica Initiative is a public-private partnership aimed at reducing maternal and child morbidity and mortality for the poorest populations in Central America and the southernmost state of Mexico. Currently at the midpoint of implementation and with external funding expected to phase out by 2020, SMI's sustainability warrants evaluation. In this study, we examine if the major SMI components fit into the Dynamic Sustainability Framework to predict whether SMI benefits could be sustainable beyond the external funding and to identify threats to sustainability. METHODS: Through the 2016 Salud Mesoamérica Initiative Process Evaluation, we applied qualitative methods including document review, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and a social network analysis to address our objective. RESULTS: SMI's design continuously evolves and aligns with national needs and objectives. Partnerships, the regional approach, and the results-based aid model create a culture that prioritizes health care. SMI's sector-wide approach and knowledge-sharing framework strengthen health systems. Evidence-based practice promotes policy dialogue and scale-up of interventions. CONCLUSION: Most SMI elements fit within the Dynamic Sustainability Framework, suggesting a likelihood of sustainability after external funding ceases, and subsequent application of lessons learned by the global community. This includes a flexible design, partnerships and a culture of prioritizing healthcare, health systems strengthening mechanisms, policy changes, and scale-ups of interventions. However, threats to sustainability, including possible transient culture of prioritizing health care, dissipation of reputational risk and financial partnerships, and personnel turnover, need to be addressed.