Short-term aid or long-term gains? Harnessing Sudan's humanitarian response for the resilience of its health system.

The Sudan 2023 Humanitarian Response Plan was revised in May, 2023, due to the escalating violence in the country. This revision increased the scale of assistance and protection activities and suspended the funding allocated for access to livelihood, access to basic services, and for the implementation of resilience solutions. We call to rethink Sudan's current humanitarian response through a pro-resilience and people-centred approach. A pro-resilience approach prioritises investments in national systems and institutions capable of delivering aid and anticipates, prevents, mitigates, and manages imminent and simultaneous shocks. A people-centred humanitarian response involves meaningful engagement of communities and collaborations with civil society organisations, which continue to be the key responders to the ongoing conflict in Sudan. Finally, we propose approaches to effectively operationalise health system resilience to enhance immediate and long-term health outcomes.

COVID-19 vaccine coverage, determinants and inequity amongst refugees and migrants in Pakistan: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Migrants and refugees are at a disadvantage in accessing basic necessities. The objective of this study is to assess the inequity in access, needs and determinants of COVID-19 vaccination among refugees and migrant populations in Pakistan. DESIGN: We conducted a mixed-method study comprising a cross-sectional survey and a qualitative study. In this paper, we will only report the findings from the cross-sectional survey. SETTING: This survey was conducted in different cities of Pakistan including Quetta, Karachi and Hyderabad. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 570 participants were surveyed including refugees and migrants, both in regular and irregular situations. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of the study was to estimate the proportion of refugees and migrants, both in regular and irregular situations vaccinated against COVID-19 and assess the inequity. The χ2 test and Fisher's exact test were used to determine the significant differences in proportions between refugees and migrants and between regions. RESULTS: The survey showed that only 26.9% of the refugee and migrant population were tested for COVID-19, 4.56% contracted coronavirus, and 3.85% were hospitalised due to COVID-19. About 66% of the refugees and migrants were fully vaccinated including those who received the single-dose vaccine or received all two doses, and 17.6% were partially vaccinated. Despite vaccination campaigns by the government, 14.4% of the refugee and migrant population remained unvaccinated mostly because of vaccines not being offered, distant vaccination sites, limited access, unavailability of COVID-19 vaccine or due to a difficult registration process. Vaccination rates varied across provinces, genders and migrant populations due to misconceptions, and several social, cultural and geographical barriers. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the COVID-19 vaccine coverage, access and inequity faced by refugees and migrants during the pandemic. It suggests early prioritisation of policies inclusive of all refugees and migrants and the provision of identification documents to ease access to basic necessities.

Have attacks on healthcare become the new normal? a public health call to action for armed conflicts before it is too late.

The scale of attacks on healthcare has become more visible and its impact greater in recent armed conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan and Myanmar. In these conflicts, combatants systematically target health facilities and ambulances. We need to ensure that attacks on healthcare do not become the new norm amongst governmental troops and non-State armed groups. There is limited evidence about why and how attacks on healthcare have become "normal" practice amongst many combatants, despite the likely tactical and strategic costs to themselves. We are convinced that the problem now needs to be tackled like any other public health issue by assessing: the scale of the problem; who is the most at risk; identifying risk factors; developing new interventions to prevent the risks or address the issue; and evaluating the effectiveness of these interventions.

Resilience in childhood vaccination: analysing delivery system responses to shocks in Lebanon.

INTRODUCTION: Despite rapidly growing academic and policy interest in health system resilience, the empirical literature on this topic remains small and focused on macrolevel effects arising from single shocks. To better understand health system responses to multiple shocks, we conducted an in-depth case study using qualitative system dynamics. We focused on routine childhood vaccination delivery in Lebanon in the context of at least three shocks overlapping to varying degrees in space and time: large-scale refugee arrivals from neighbouring Syria; COVID-19; and an economic crisis. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were performed with 38 stakeholders working at different levels in the system. Interview transcripts were analysed using purposive text analysis to generate individual stakeholder causal loop diagrams (CLDs) mapping out relationships between system variables contributing to changes in coverage for routine antigens over time. These were then combined using a stepwise process to produce an aggregated CLD. The aggregated CLD was validated using a reserve set of interview transcripts. RESULTS: Various system responses to shocks were identified, including demand promotion measures such as scaling-up community engagement activities and policy changes to reduce the cost of vaccination to service users, and supply side responses including donor funding mobilisation, diversification of service delivery models and cold chain strengthening. Some systemic changes were introduced-particularly in response to refugee arrivals-including task-shifting to nurse-led vaccine administration. Potentially transformative change was seen in the integration of private sector clinics to support vaccination delivery and depended on both demand side and supply side changes. Some resilience-promoting measures introduced following earlier shocks paradoxically increased vulnerability to later ones. CONCLUSION: Flexibility in financing and human resource allocation appear key for system resilience regardless of the shock. System dynamics offers a promising method for ex ante modelling of ostensibly resilience-strengthening interventions under different shock scenarios, to identify-and safeguard against-unintended consequences.

Destruction, disruption and disaster: Sudan's health system amidst armed conflict.

The ongoing armed conflict in Sudan has resulted in a deepening humanitarian crisis with significant implications for the country's health system, threatening its collapse. This article examines the destruction, disruption, and disastrous consequences inflicted upon Sudan's health system. The conflict has led to the severe compromise of healthcare facilities, with only one-third of hospitals in conflict zones operational. Artillery attacks, forced militarization, power outages, and shortages of medical supplies and personnel have further crippled the health system. The exodus of health workers and escalating violence have exacerbated the crisis. Disrupted service delivery has resulted in the interruption of essential health services, including obstetric care, emergency services, and dialysis. Financial losses to the health system are estimated at $700 million, impacting an already underfunded sector. We identify that in addition to restoration of peace and mobilization of urgent aid, immediate prioritization of the reconstruction of the health system is crucial to mitigate the long-term consequences of the war. Rebuilding a resilient health system is sine qua non for Sudan's progress towards universal health.

Lessons from the development process of the Afghanistan integrated package of essential health services.

In 2017, in the middle of the armed conflict with the Taliban, the Ministry of Public Health decided that the Afghan health system needed a well-defined priority package of health services taking into account the increasing burden of non-communicable diseases and injuries and benefiting from the latest evidence published by DCP3. This leads to a 2-year process involving data analysis, modelling and national consultations, which produce this Integrated Package of Essential health Services (IPEHS). The IPEHS was finalised just before the takeover by the Taliban and could not be implemented. The Afghanistan experience has highlighted the need to address not only the content of a more comprehensive benefit package, but also its implementation and financing. The IPEHS could be used as a basis to help professionals and the new authorities to define their priorities.

Health system resilience: a critical review and reconceptualisation.

This Viewpoint brings together insights from health system experts working in a range of settings. Our focus is on examining the state of the resilience field, including current thinking on definitions, conceptualisation, critiques, measurement, and capabilities. We highlight the analytical value of resilience, but also its risks, which include neglect of equity and of who is bearing the costs of resilience strategies. Resilience depends crucially on relationships between system actors and components, and-as amply shown during the COVID-19 pandemic-relationships with wider systems (eg, economic, political, and global governance structures). Resilience is therefore connected to power imbalances, which need to be addressed to enact the transformative strategies that are important in dealing with more persistent shocks and stressors, such as climate change. We discourage the framing of resilience as an outcome that can be measured; instead, we see it emerge from systemic resources and interactions, which have effects that can be measured. We propose a more complex categorisation of shocks than the common binary one of acute versus chronic, and outline some of the implications of this for resilience strategies. We encourage a shift in thinking from capacities towards capabilities-what actors could do in future with the necessary transformative strategies, which will need to encompass global, national, and local change. Finally, we highlight lessons emerging in relation to preparing for the next crisis, particularly in clarifying roles and avoiding fragmented governance.

Realistic Evaluation of the Integrated Electronic Diagnosis Approach (IeDA) for the Management of Childhood Illnesses at Primary Health Facilities in Burkina Faso.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, Terre des Hommes (Tdh) together with the Ministry of Health (MoH) launched the Integrated electronic Diagnosis Approach (IeDA) intervention in two regions of Burkina Faso consisting of supplying every health centre with a digital algorithm. A realistic evaluation was conducted to understand the implementation process, the mechanisms by which the IeDA intervention lead to change. METHODS: Data collection took place between January 2016 and October 2017. Direct observation in health centres were conducted. In-depth interviews were conducted with 154 individuals including 92 healthcare workers (HCW) from health centres, 16 officers from district health authorities, 6 members of health centre management committees. In addition, 5 focus groups were organised with carers. The initial coding was based on a preliminary list of codes inspired by the middle-range theory (MRT). RESULTS: Our results showed that the adoption of the electronic protocol depended on a multiplicity of management practices including role distribution, team work, problem solving approach, task monitoring, training, supervision, support and recognition. Such changes lead to reorganising the health team and redistributing roles before and during consultation, and positive atmosphere that included recognition of each team member, organisational commitment and sense of belonging. Conditions for such management changes to be effective included open dialog at all levels of the system, a minimum of resources to cover the support services and supervision and regular discussions focusing on solving problems faced by health centre teams. CONCLUSION: This project reinforces the point that in a successful diffusion of IeDA, it is necessary to combine the introduction of technology with support and management mechanisms. It also important to highlight that managers' attitude plays a great place in the success of the intervention: open dialog and respect are crucial dimensions. This is aligned with the findings from other studies.

Re-evaluating Our Knowledge of Health System Resilience During COVID-19: Lessons From the First Two Years of the Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Health challenges like coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are becoming increasingly complex, transnational, and unpredictable. Studying health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to enhance our understanding of health system resilience and establish a clearer link between theoretical concepts and practical ideas on how to build resilience. METHODS: This narrative literature review aims to address four questions using a health system resilience framework: (i) What do we understand about the dimensions of resilience? (ii) What aspects of the resilience dimensions remain uncertain? (iii) What aspects of the resilience dimensions are missing from the COVID-19 discussions? and (iv) What has COVID-19 taught us about resilience that is missing from the framework? A scientific literature database search was conducted in December 2020 and in April 2022 to identify publications that discussed health system resilience in relation to COVID-19, excluding articles on psychological and other types of resilience. A total of 63 publications were included. RESULTS: There is good understanding around information sharing, flexibility and good leadership, learning, maintaining essential services, and the need for legitimate, interdependent systems. Decision-making, localized trust, influences on interdependence, and transformation remain uncertain. Vertical interdependence, monitoring risks beyond the health system, and consequences of changes on the system were not discussed. Teamwork, actor legitimacy, values, inclusivity, trans-sectoral resilience, and the role of the private sector are identified as lessons from COVID-19 that should be further explored for health system resilience. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of health system resilience has continued to cohere following the pandemic. The eventual consequences of system changes and the resilience of subsystems are underexplored. Through governance, the concept of health system resilience can be linked to wider issues raised by the pandemic, like inclusivity. Our findings show the utility of resilience theory for strengthening health systems for crises and the benefit of continuing to refine existing resilience theory.

Monitoring and evaluating the implementation of essential packages of health services.

Essential packages of health services (EPHS) are a critical tool for achieving universal health coverage, especially in low-income and lower middle-income countries. However, there is a lack of guidance and standards for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of EPHS implementation. This paper is the final in a series of papers reviewing experiences using evidence from the Disease Control Priorities, third edition publications in EPHS reforms in seven countries. We assess current approaches to EPHS M&E, including case studies of M&E approaches in Ethiopia and Pakistan. We propose a step-by-step process for developing a national EPHS M&E framework. Such a framework would start with a theory of change that links to the specific health system reforms the EPHS is trying to accomplish, including explicit statements about the 'what' and 'for whom' of M&E efforts. Monitoring frameworks need to consider the additional demands that could be placed on weak and already overstretched data systems, and they must ensure that processes are put in place to act quickly on emergent implementation challenges. Evaluation frameworks could learn from the field of implementation science; for example, by adapting the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework to policy implementation. While each country will need to develop its own locally relevant M&E indicators, we encourage all countries to include a set of core indicators that are aligned with the Sustainable Development Goal 3 targets and indicators. Our paper concludes with a call to reprioritise M&E more generally and to use the EPHS process as an opportunity for strengthening national health information systems. We call for an international learning network on EPHS M&E to generate new evidence and exchange best practices.

Country readiness and prerequisites for successful design and transition to implementation of essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.

This paper reviews the experience of six low-income and lower middle-income countries in setting their own essential packages of health services (EPHS), with the purpose of identifying the key requirements for the successful design and transition to implementation of the packages in the context of accelerating progress towards universal health coverage (UHC). The analysis is based on input from three meetings of a knowledge network established by the Disease Control Priorities 3 Country Translation Project and working groups, supplemented by a survey of participating countries.All countries endorsed the Sustainable Development Goals target 3.8 on UHC for achievement by 2030. The assessment of country experiences found that health system strengthening and mobilising and sustaining health financing are major challenges. EPHS implementation is more likely when health system gaps are addressed and when there are realistic and sustainable financing prospects. However, health system assessments were inadequate and the government planning and finance sectors were not consistently engaged in setting the EPHS in most of the countries studied. There was also a need for greater engagement with community and civil society representatives, academia and the private sector in package design. Leadership and reinforcement of technical and managerial capacity are critical in the transition from EPHS design to sustained implementation, as are strong human resources and country ownership of the process. Political commitment beyond the health sector is key, particularly commitment from parliamentarians and policymakers in the planning and finance sectors. National ownership, institutionalisation of technical and managerial capacity and reinforcing human resources are critical for success.The review concludes that four prerequisites are crucial for a successful EPHS: (1) sustained high-level commitment, (2) sustainable financing, (3) health system readiness, and (4) institutionalisation.

Decision-making processes for essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.

Many countries around the world strive for universal health coverage, and an essential packages of health services (EPHS) is a central policy instrument for countries to achieve this. It defines the coverage of services that are made available, as well as the proportion of the costs that are covered from different financial schemes and who can receive these services. This paper reports on the development of an analytical framework on the decision-making process of EPHS revision, and the review of practices of six countries (Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and Zanzibar-Tanzania).The analytical framework distinguishes the practical organisation, fairness and institutionalisation of decision-making processes. The review shows that countries: (1) largely follow a similar practical stepwise process but differ in their implementation of some steps, such as the choice of decision criteria; (2) promote fairness in their EPHS process by involving a range of stakeholders, which in the case of Zanzibar included patients and community members; (3) are transparent in terms of at least some of the steps of their decision-making process and (4) in terms of institutionalisation, express a high degree of political will for ongoing EPHS revision with almost all countries having a designated governing institute for EPHS revision.We advise countries to organise meaningful stakeholder involvement and foster the transparency of the decision-making process, as these are key to fairness in decision-making. We also recommend countries to take steps towards the institutionalisation of their EPHS revision process.

Auditing the quality of epidemic decision-making in Somalia: a pilot evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess decision-making quality through piloting an audit tool among decision-makers responding to the COVID-19 epidemic in Somalia. DESIGN AND SETTING: We utilised a mixed-methods programme evaluation design comprising quantitative and qualitative methods. Decision-makers in Somalia piloted the audit tool generating a scorecard for decision-making in epidemic response. They also participated in key informant interviews discussing their experience with the audit process and results. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 18 decision-makers from two humanitarian agencies responding to COVID-19 in Somalia were recruited to pilot the audit tool. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: We used thematic analysis to assess the feasibility and perceived utility of the audit tool by intended users (decision-makers). We also calculated Fleiss' Kappa to assess inter-rater agreement in the audit scorecard. RESULTS: The audit highlighted areas of improvement in decision-making among both organisations including in the dimensions of accountability and transparency. Despite the audit occurring in a highly complex operating environment, decision-makers found the process to be feasible and of high utility. The flexibility of the audit approach allowed for organisations to adapt the audit to their needs. As a result, organisation reported a high level of acceptance of the findings. CONCLUSION: Strengthening decision-making processes is key to realising the objectives of epidemic response. This pilot evaluation contributes towards this goal by the testing what, to our knowledge, may be the first tool designed specifically to assess quality of decision-making processes in epidemic response. The tool has proven feasible and acceptable in assessing decision-making quality in an ongoing response and has potential applicability in assessing decision-making in broader humanitarian response.