The state of primary health care in south Asia.

The south Asian region (SAR) is home to 1·74 billion people, corresponding to 22% of the global population. The region faces several challenges pertaining to changing epidemiology, rapid urbanisation, and social and economic concerns, which affect health outcomes. Primary health care (PHC) is a cost-effective strategy to respond to these challenges through integrated service delivery, multi-sectoral action, and empowered communities. The PHC approach has historically been an important cornerstone of health policy in SAR countries. However, the region is yet to fully reap the benefits of PHC-oriented health systems. Our introductory paper in this Lancet Series on PHC in the SAR describes the existing PHC delivery structure in five SAR nations (ie, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) and critically appraises PHC performance to identify its enablers and barriers. The paper proposes investing in a shared culture of innovation and collaboration for revitalisation of PHC in the region.

Improving urban health through primary health care in south Asia.

South Asia is rapidly urbanising. The strains of rapid urbanisation have profound implications for the health and equity of urban populations. This Series paper examines primary health care (PHC) in south Asian cities. Health and its social determinants vary considerably across south Asian cities and substantial socioeconomic inequities are present. Although cities offer easy geographical access to PHC services, financial hardship associated with health care use and low quality of care are a concern, particularly for low-income residents. Providing better PHC in south Asia requires a multi-sectoral response, with effective and resourced urban local bodies; increased public financing for health care; and new service delivery models aimed at low-income urban communities that involve strengthening public sector services, strengthening government engagement with private providers where necessary, and engaging with low-income communities and the PHC providers that serve them.

Voting with their feet: Primary care provider choice and its implications for public sector primary care services in India.

Expanding networks of government primary health centers (PHCs) to bring health services closer to communities is a longstanding policy objective in LMICs. In pluralistic health systems, where public and private providers compete for patients, PHCs are often not the preferred source for care. This study analyzes the market for primary care services in the Indian state of Bihar to understand how choice of primary care provider is influenced by distance, cost and quality of care. This study is based on linked surveys of rural households, PHCs, and private primary care providers conducted in 2019 and 2020. Most rural residents lived in proximity to a primary care provider, though not a qualified one. Within a 5-km distance, 60% of villages had a PHC, 90% had an informal provider, 35% an Indian systems of medicine practitioner, and 10% a private MBBS doctor. Most patients sought care from informal providers irrespective of PHC distance; only 25% of patients living in the PHC's vicinity sought care there. Reducing distance to the PHC by 1 km marginally increased the likehood of the PHC being selected, and reduced the likelihood of private clinics being selected. Reducing patient's costs at PHCs increased the likelihood of the PHC being selected and reduced the likelihood of private clinics and private hospitals being selected. Improved clinical quality at PHCs had no effect on patient selection of PHCs, private clinics, or hospitals. Illness severity reduced the likelihood of PHCs or private clinics being selected, and increased the likelihood of private hospitals selected. Wealthier patients were marginally more likely to use PHCs, substantially more likely to use private hospitals, and less likely to use private clinics. Expanding PHC network coverage or improving their quality of care is not sufficient to make PHCs more relevant to local health needs. An orientation towards essential public health functions, as well as, a community-centered approach to the organization of primary health care system is necessary.

Improving quality of non-communicable disease services at primary care facilities in middle-income countries: A scoping review.

Health systems in middle-income countries face important challenges in managing the high burden of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD). Primary health care is widely recognized as key to managing NCDs in communities. However, the effectiveness of this approach is limited by poor quality of care (QoC), among others. This scoping review identifies the types of interventions that have been used in middle-income countries to improve the quality of NCD services at primary care facilities. Further, it identifies the range of outcomes these quality interventions have influenced. This scoping review covered both the grey and peer-reviewed literature. The 149 articles reviewed were classified into four domains - governance, service-delivery systems, health workforce, and patients and communities. There was a remarkable unevenness in the geographic distribution of studies - lower middle-income countries and some regions (Middle East, North Africa, and South East Asia) had a scarcity of published studies. NCDs such as stroke and cardiovascular disease, mental health, cancer, and respiratory disorders received less attention. The thrust of quality interventions was directed at the practice of NCD care by clinicians, facilities, or patients. Few studies provided evidence from interventions at the organizations or policy levels. Overall, effectiveness of quality interventions was mixed across domains. In general, positive or mixed effects on provider clinical skills and behavior, as well as, improvements in patient outcomes were found across interventions. Access to care and coverage of screening services were positively influenced by the interventions reviewed. This review shows that quality improvement interventions tried in middle-income countries mostly focused at the provider and facility level, with few focusing on the organizational and policy level. There is a need to further study the effectiveness of organizational and policy level interventions on the practice and outcomes of NCD care.

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.

Evidence for an expanded hypertension care cascade in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: With nearly 90% of annual hypertension-related deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is an urgent need to measure the coverage of health services that effectively manage hypertension. However, there is little agreement on how to define effective coverage and the existing hypertension care cascade (hypertension prevalence, percent aware, percent treated, and percent controlled) does not account for the quality of care received by patients. This study reviews definitions of effective coverage and service quality for hypertension management services and proposes an expanded hypertension care cascade to improve measurement of health systems performance. METHODS: A systematic scoping review of literature published in six electronic databases between January 2000 and October 2020 identified studies that defined effective coverage of hypertension management services or integrated dimensions of service quality into population-based estimates of hypertension management in LMICs. Findings informed an expanded hypertension care cascade from which quality-adjusted service coverage can be calculated to approximate effective coverage. RESULTS: The review identified 18 relevant studies, including 6 that defined effective coverage for hypertension management services and 12 that reported a measure of service quality in a population-based study. Based on commonly reported barriers to hypertension management, new steps on the proposed expanded care cascade include (i) population screened, (ii) population linked to quality care, and (iii) population adhering to prescribed treatment. CONCLUSION: There is little consensus on the definition of effective coverage of hypertension management services, and most studies do not describe the quality of hypertension management services provided to populations. Incorporating aspects of service quality to the hypertension care cascade allows for the calculation of quality-adjusted coverage of relevant services, enabling an appropriate measurement of health systems performance through effective coverage.

Exit strategies from lockdowns due to COVID-19: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, countries have adopted various degrees of restrictive measures on people to reduce COVID-19 transmission. These measures have had significant social and economic costs. In the absence of therapeutics, and low vaccination coverage, strategies for a safe exit plan from a lockdown are required to mitigate the transmission and simultaneously re-open societies. Most countries have outlined or have implemented lockdown exit plans. The objective of this scoping review is to (a) identify and map the different strategies for exit from lockdowns, (b) document the effects of these exit strategies, and (c) discuss features of successful exit strategies based on the evidence. METHODS: A five-step approach was used in this scoping review: (a) identifying the research question and inclusion/exclusion criteria; (b) searching the literature using keywords within PubMed and WHO databases; (c) study selection; (d) data extraction; (e) collating results and qualitative synthesis of findings. RESULTS: Of the 406 unique studies found, 107 were kept for full-text review. Studies suggest the post-peak period as optimal timing for an exit, supplemented by other triggers such as sufficient health system capacity, and increased testing rate. A controlled and step-wise exit plan which is flexible and guided by information from surveillance systems is optimal. Studies recommend continued use of non-pharmaceutical interventions such as physical distancing, use of facemasks, and hygiene measures, in different combinations when exiting from a lockdown, even after optimal vaccination coverage has been attained. CONCLUSION: Reviewed studies have suggested adopting a multi-pronged strategy consisting of different approaches depending on the context. Among the different exit strategies reviewed (phase-wise exit, hard exit, and constant cyclic patterns of lockdown), phase-wise exit appears to be the optimal exit strategy.

Barriers to effective hypertension management in rural Bihar, India: A cross-sectional, linked supply- and demand-side study.

Effective management of hypertension in low- and middle-income settings is a persistent public health challenge. This study examined supply- and demand-side barriers to receiving quality care and achieving effective hypertension management in rural Bihar, India. A state-representative household survey collected information from adults over 30 years of age on characteristics of the hypertension screening, diagnosis, and management services they received. A linked provider assessment determined the percent of providers who provided quality hypertension care (i.e., had a functioning BP measurement device, measured a patient's BP, could correctly diagnose hypertension, had at least one first-line antihypertension medication, and could prescribe correctly based on standard guidelines). Patients were linked with their provider to determine the quality-adjusted coverage of hypertension management and logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine characteristics associated with receiving quality care. A total of 14,386 patients and 390 providers were studied. Nearly a quarter (22.5%) of adults had never had their BP measured before and 8.1% of adults reported a previous hypertension diagnosis. Less than one third (31.0%) of all interviewed providers demonstrated ability to provide quality hypertension care, and quality varied between provider types (14.8% of private homeopathic, 25.2% of informal, 40.0% of private modern medicine, and 60.0% of public providers gave quality care). While 95.8% of diagnosed individuals received some treatment, only 10.9% of patients received care from quality local providers. Nearly 45% of individuals with hypertension received care from non-local providers. Individuals from the general caste with comorbidities living in villages with more high-quality providers were most likely to receive quality care from a local provider. Whereas the coverage of services for individuals diagnosed with hypertension is high, the quality of these services is suboptimal for economically and socially vulnerable populations, which limits effective management and control of hypertension in rural Bihar. Efforts should be targeted towards providers to initiate quality treatment upon diagnosis, including correct prescription of antihypertensives.

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.

Does social capital increase healthcare financing's projection? Results from the rural household of Uttar Pradesh, India.

In the absence of adequate social security, out-of-pocket health expenditure compels households to adopt coping strategies, such as utilizing savings, selling assets, or acquiring external financial support (EFS) by borrowing with interest. Households' probability of acquiring EFS and its amount (intensity) depends on its social capital - the nature of social relationships and resources embedded within social networks. This study examines the effect of social capital on the probability and intensity of EFS during health events in Uttar Pradesh (UP), India. The analysis used data from a cross-sectional survey of 6218 households, reporting 3066 healthcare events, from two districts of UP. Household heads (HH) reported demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related information, including EFS, for each household member. Self-reported data from Shortened and Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool in India (SASCAT-I) was used to generate four unique social capital measures (organizational participation, social support, trust, and social cohesion) at HH and community-level, using multilevel confirmatory factor analysis. After descriptive analysis, two-part mixed-effect models were implemented to estimate the probability and intensity of EFS as a function of social capital measures, where multilevel mixed-effects probit regression was used as the first-part and multilevel mixed-effects linear model with log link and gamma distribution as the second-part. Controlling for all covariates, the probability of acquiring EFS significantly increased (p = 0.04) with higher social support of the HH and significantly decreased (p = 0.02) with higher community social cohesion. Conditional to receiving any EFS, higher social trust of the HH resulted in higher intensity of EFS (p = 0.09). Social support and trust may enable households to cope up with financial stress. However, controlling for the other dimensions of social capital, high cohesiveness with the community might restrict a household's access to external resources demonstrating the unintended effect of social capital exerted by formal or informal social control.

An Empirical Examination of the Inequality of Forgone Care in India.

Understanding how well a health system is meeting the needs of the population is critical to achieving the policy aspirations of universal health coverage. This study focuses on assessing the inequity of forgone care for priority maternal and child health services across India. We utilize data from the 4th round of the Indian National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) to examine inequality of forgone care. Our outcomes include forgone institutional delivery, antenatal care, medical care for a child with fever or cough, and medical care for a child with diarrhea. Wagstaff's standardized concentration indices (CIs) are computed at the national level, over urban and rural sub-populations, and by state. Regression decomposition is performed to determine the influence of specific drivers on overall inequality. There was significant variation in the national-level prevalence and CIs for forgone antenatal care (17.8%, CI: -0.423), forgone medical care for a child with fever or cough (32.4%, CI: -0.199), forgone medical care for a child with diarrhea (33.8%, CI: -0.172), and forgone institutional delivery (24.5%, CI: -0.436). For all outcomes, forgone care is disproportionately concentrated among the poor, particularly in rural areas. There is also significant heterogeneity in state-level inequalities. Decomposition analyses show that socioeconomic status, maternal education, rural status, and state-level per capita health spending are the leading drivers of observed inequalities in forgone care. Results suggest attending to both the operation and financing of India's health care system as well as the social determinants that make poor women more likely to forgo maternal health care.

Effectiveness of hospital payment reforms in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Payment mechanisms have attracted substantial research interest because of their consequent effect on care outcomes, including treatment costs, admission and readmission rates and patient satisfaction. Those mechanisms create the incentive environment within which health workers operate and can influence provider behaviour in ways that can facilitate achievement of national health policy goals. This systematic review aims to understand the effects of changes in hospital payment mechanisms introduced in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on hospital- and patient-level outcomes. A standardised search of seven databases and a manual search of the grey literature and reference lists of existing reviews were performed to identify relevant articles published between January 2000 and July 2019. We included original studies focused on hospital payment reforms and their effect on hospital and patient outcomes in LMICs. Narrative descriptions or studies focusing only on provider payments or primary care settings were excluded. The authors used the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool to assess the risk of bias and quality. Results were synthesized in a narrative description due to methodological heterogeneity. A total of 24 articles from seven middle-income countries were included, the majority of which are from Asia. In most cases, hospital payment reforms included shifts from passive (fee-for-service) to active payment models-the most common being diagnosis-related group payments, capitation and global budget. In general, hospital payment reforms were associated with decreases in hospital expenditures, out-of-pocket payments, length of hospital stay and readmission rates. The majority of the articles scored low on quality due to weak study design. A shift from passive to active hospital payment methods in LMICs has been associated with lower hospital and patient costs as well as increased efficiency without any apparent compromise on quality. However, there is an important need for high-quality studies in this area.

Pandemic response in pluralistic health systems: a cross-sectional study of COVID-19 knowledge and practices among informal and formal primary care providers in Bihar, India.

OBJECTIVES: Responding to pandemics is challenging in pluralistic health systems. This study assesses COVID-19 knowledge and case management of informal providers (IPs), trained practitioners of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy (AYUSH) and Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) medical doctors providing primary care services in rural Bihar, India. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of primary care providers conducted via telephone between 1 and 15 July 2020. SETTING: Primary care providers from 224 villages in 34 districts across Bihar, India. PARTICIPANTS: 452 IPs, 57 AYUSH practitioners and 38 doctors (including 23 government doctors) were interviewed from a census of 1138 primary care providers used by community members that could be reached by telephone. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Providers were interviewed using a structured questionnaire with choice-based answers to gather information on (1) change in patient care seeking, (2) source of COVID-19 information, (3) knowledge on COVID-19 spread, symptoms and methods for prevention and (4) clinical management of COVID-19. RESULTS: During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, 72% of providers reported a decrease in patient visits. Most IPs and other private primary care providers reported receiving no COVID-19 related engagement with government or civil society agencies. For them, the principal source of COVID-19 information was television and newspapers. IPs had reasonably good knowledge of typical COVID-19 symptoms and prevention, and at levels similar to doctors. However, there was low stated compliance among IPs (16%) and qualified primary care providers (15% of MBBS doctors and 12% of AYUSH practitioners) with all WHO recommended management practices for suspect COVID-19 cases. Nearly half of IPs and other providers intended to treat COVID-19 suspects without referral. CONCLUSIONS: Poor management practices of COVID-19 suspects by rural primary care providers weakens government pandemic control efforts. Government action of providing information to IPs, as well as engaging them in contact tracing or public health messaging can strengthen pandemic control efforts.

Not just money: what mothers value in conditional cash transfer programs in India.

INTRODUCTION: Conditional cash transfers (CCTs) have become an important policy tool for increasing demand for key maternal and child health services in low/middle-income countries. Yet, these programs have had variable success in increasing service use. Understanding beneficiary preferences for design features of CCTs can increase program effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a Discrete choice experiment in two districts of Uttar Pradesh, India in 2018 with 405 mothers with young children (<3 years). Respondents were asked to choose between hypothetical CCT programme profiles described in terms of five attribute levels (cash, antenatal care visits, growth-monitoring and immunisation visits, visit duration and health benefit received) and responses were analysed using mixed logit regression. RESULTS: Mothers most valued the cash transfer amount, followed by the health benefit received from services. Mothers did not have a strong preference for conditionalities related to the number of health centre visits or for time spent seeking care; however, service delivery points were in close proximity to households. Mothers were willing to accept lower cash rewards for better perceived health benefits-they were willing to accept 2854 Indian rupees ($41) less for a programme that produced good health, which is about half the amount currently offered by India's Maternal Benefits Program. Mothers who had low utilisation of health services, and those from poor households, valued the cash transfer and the health benefit significantly more than others. CONCLUSION: Both cash transfers and the perceived health benefit from services are highly valued, particularly by infrequent service users. In CCTs, this highlights the importance of communicating value of services to beneficiaries by informing about health benefits of services and providing quality care. Conditionalities requiring frequent health centre visits or time taken for seeking care may not have large negative effects on CCT participation in contexts of good service coverage.

In-service nurse mentoring in 2020, the year of the nurse and the midwife: learning from Bihar, India.

In-service nurse mentoring is increasingly seen as a way to strengthen the quality of health care in rural areas, where healthworkers are scarce. Despite this, the evidence base for designing large-scale programs remains relatively thin. In this capacity-building article, we reflect on the limited evidence that exists and introduce features of the world's largest program, run by CARE-India since 2015. Detail on the mechanics of large-scale programs is often missing from empirical research studies, but is a crucial aspect of organizational learning and development. Moreover, by focusing on the complex ways in which capacity-building is being institutionalized through an embedded model of in-service mentorship, this article bridges research and practice. We point to a number of areas that require further research as well as considerations for program managers designing comparable workforce strengthening programs. With careful planning and cross-national policy learning, we propose that in-service nurse mentoring may offer a cost-effective and appropriate workforce development approach in a variety of settings.

Mentoring the working nurse: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Mentoring programs for nurses already in the health workforce are growing in importance. Yet, the settings, goals, scale, and key features of these programs are not widely known. OBJECTIVE: To identify and synthesize research on in-service nurse mentoring programs. METHODS: We reviewed nurse mentoring research from six databases. Studies either referred explicitly to in-service nurse mentoring programs, were reviews of such programs, or concerned nurse training/education in which mentoring was an essential component. RESULTS: We included 69 articles from 11 countries, published from 1995 to 2019. Most articles were from high-income countries (n = 46) and in rural areas (n = 22). Programs were developed to strengthen clinical care (particularly maternal and neonatal care), promote evidence-based practice, promote retention, support new graduate nurses, and develop nurse leaders. Of the articles with sufficient data, they typically described small programs implemented in one facility (n = 23), with up to ten mentors (n = 13), with less than 50 mentees (n = 25), meeting at least once a month (n = 27), and lasting at least a year (n = 24). While over half of the studies (n = 36) described programs focused almost exclusively on clinical skills acquisition, many (n = 33) specified non-clinical professional development activities. Reflective practice featured to a varying extent in many articles (n = 29). Very few (n = 6) explicitly identified the theoretical basis of their programs. CONCLUSIONS: Although the literature about in-service nurse mentoring comes mostly from small programs in high-income countries, the largest nurse mentoring programs in the world are in low- and middle-income countries. Much can be learned from studying these programs in greater detail. Future research should analyze key features of programs to make models of mentoring more transparent and translatable. If carefully designed and flexibly implemented, in-service nurse mentoring represents an exciting avenue for enhancing the role of nurses and midwives in people-centered health system strengthening. The contents in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the U.S. Agency for International Development or the U.S. Government.

Social capital and peer influence of tobacco consumption: a cross-sectional study among household heads in rural Uttar Pradesh, India.

OBJECTIVE: Having the world's second-largest tobacco-consuming population, tobacco control is a priority agenda of the Indian Government. Yet, there is no evidence of how peer influence and nature of social relationships-defined as social capital-affect tobacco use. This study aimed to explore the role of social capital and peer influence on tobacco consumption among household heads in rural Uttar Pradesh (UP), India. DESIGN AND SETTING: This study was embedded within the baseline evaluation of Project Samuday. A cross-sectional multistage cluster survey was implemented in six census blocks of Hardoi and Sitapur districts of UP from June to August 2017. Self-reported tobacco consumption status of randomly selected 6218 household heads (≥18 years; men vs women=5312 vs 906) was assessed from 346 rural communities. Peer influence of tobacco use was measured by the non-self cluster proportion of tobacco consumption among respondents. Community engagement, social support, trust and social cohesion were separately measured as unique facets of social capital both at individual and community levels using the Shortened Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool in India (SASCAT-I). The explanatory power of covariates was assessed using gender-stratified generalised estimating equations (GEE) with robust-variance estimator. RESULT: Tobacco consumption patterns were starkly different for men and women (71% vs 14%). The peer influence only affected men (adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=1.10, 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.16, p<0.01), whereas women were more likely to consume tobacco if they were more engaged with community organisations (AOR=1.33, 95% CI=1.07 to 1.66, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Gender alters the way social engagement affects tobacco use in rural India. Countering peer influence on Indian men should be prioritised as a tobacco control strategy. Moreover, as gender mainstreaming is a critical egalitarian agenda in India, further research is needed to understand how social engagement affects tobacco consumption behaviours among women.

The need for COVID-19 research in low- and middle-income countries.

In the early months of the pandemic, most reported cases and deaths due to COVID-19 occurred in high-income countries. However, insufficient testing could have led to an underestimation of true infections in many low- and middle-income countries. As confirmed cases increase, the ultimate impact of the pandemic on individuals and communities in low- and middle-income countries is uncertain. We therefore propose research in three broad areas as urgently needed to inform responses in low- and middle-income countries: transmission patterns of SARS-CoV-2, the clinical characteristics of the disease, and the impact of pandemic prevention and response measures. Answering these questions will require a multidisciplinary approach led by local investigators and in some cases additional resources. Targeted research activities should be done to help mitigate the potential burden of COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries without diverting the limited human resources, funding, or medical supplies from response activities.

Health equity and COVID-19: global perspectives.

The COVID-19 is disproportionally affecting the poor, minorities and a broad range of vulnerable populations, due to its inequitable spread in areas of dense population and limited mitigation capacity due to high prevalence of chronic conditions or poor access to high quality public health and medical care. Moreover, the collateral effects of the pandemic due to the global economic downturn, and social isolation and movement restriction measures, are unequally affecting those in the lowest power strata of societies. To address the challenges to health equity and describe some of the approaches taken by governments and local organizations, we have compiled 13 country case studies from various regions around the world: China, Brazil, Thailand, Sub Saharan Africa, Nicaragua, Armenia, India, Guatemala, United States of America (USA), Israel, Australia, Colombia, and Belgium. This compilation is by no-means representative or all inclusive, and we encourage researchers to continue advancing global knowledge on COVID-19 health equity related issues, through rigorous research and generation of a strong evidence base of new empirical studies in this field.