The impact of introducing new vaccines on the health system: case studies from six low- and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the impacts of new vaccine introductions on immunization programmes and health systems in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We conducted case studies of seven vaccine introductions in six countries (Cameroon, PCV;Ethiopia, PCV; Guatemala, rotavirus; Kenya, PCV; Mali, Meningitis A; Mali, PCV; Rwanda, HPV). Inter-views were conducted with 261 national, regional and district key informants and questionnaires were completed with staff from 196 health facilities. Routine data from districts and health facilities were gathered on vaccination and antenatal service use. Data collection and analysis were structured around the World Health Organisation health system building blocks. FINDINGS: The new vaccines were viewed positively and seemed to integrate well into existing health systems. The introductions were found to have had no impact on many elements within the building blocks framework. Despite many key informants and facility respondents perceiving that the new vaccine introductions had increased coverage of other vaccines, the routine data showed no change. Positive effects perceived included enhanced credibility of the immunisation programme and strengthened health workers' skills through training. Negative effects reported included an increase in workload and stock outs of the new vaccine, which created a perception in the community that all vaccines were out of stock in a facility. Most effects were found within the vaccination programmes; very few were reported on the broader health systems. Effects were primarily reported to be temporary, around the time of introduction only. CONCLUSION: Although the new vaccine introductions were viewed as intrinsically positive, on the whole there was no evidence that they had any major impact, positive or negative, on the broader health systems.

Stated preferences of doctors for choosing a job in rural areas of Peru: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Doctors' scarcity in rural areas remains a serious problem in Latin America and Peru. Few studies have explored job preferences of doctors working in underserved areas. We aimed to investigate doctors' stated preferences for rural jobs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A labelled discrete choice experiment (DCE) was performed in Ayacucho, an underserved department of Peru. Preferences were assessed for three locations: rural community, Ayacucho city (Ayacucho's capital) and other provincial capital city. Policy simulations were run to assess the effect of job attributes on uptake of a rural post. Multiple conditional logistic regressions were used to assess the relative importance of job attributes and of individual characteristics. A total of 102 doctors participated. They were five times more likely to choose a job post in Ayacucho city over a rural community (OR 4.97, 95%CI 1.2; 20.54). Salary increases and bonus points for specialization acted as incentives to choose a rural area, while increase in the number of years needed to get a permanent post acted as a disincentive. Being male and working in a hospital reduced considerably chances of choosing a rural job, while not living with a partner increased them. Policy simulations showed that a package of 75% salary increase, getting a permanent contract after two years in rural settings, and getting bonus points for further specialisation increased rural job uptake from 21% to 77%. A package of 50% salary increase plus bonus points for further specialisation would also increase the rural uptake from 21% to 52%. CONCLUSIONS: Doctors are five times more likely to favour a job in urban areas over rural settings. This strong preference needs to be overcome by future policies aimed at improving the scarcity of rural doctors. Some incentives, alone or combined, seem feasible and sustainable, whilst others may pose a high fiscal burden.

Job preferences of nurses and midwives for taking up a rural job in Peru: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Robust evidence on interventions to improve the shortage of health workers in rural areas is needed. We assessed stated factors that would attract short-term contract nurses and midwives to work in a rural area of Peru. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to evaluate the job preferences of nurses and midwives currently working on a short-term contract in the public sector in Ayacucho, Peru. Job attributes, and their levels, were based on literature review, qualitative interviews and focus groups of local health personnel and policy makers. A labelled design with two choices, rural community or Ayacucho city, was used. Job attributes were tailored to these settings. Multiple conditional logistic regressions were used to assess the determinants of job preferences. Then we used the best-fitting estimated model to predict the impact of potential policy incentives on the probability of choosing a rural job or a job in Ayacucho city. We studied 205 nurses and midwives. The odds of choosing an urban post was 14.74 times than that of choosing a rural one. Salary increase, health center-type of facility and scholarship for specialization were preferred attributes for choosing a rural job. Increased number of years before securing a permanent contract acted as a disincentive for both rural and urban jobs. Policy simulations showed that the most effective attraction package to uptake a rural job included a 75% increase in salary plus scholarship for a specialization, which would increase the proportion of health workers taking a rural job from 36.4% up to 60%. CONCLUSIONS: Urban jobs were more strongly preferred than rural ones. However, combined financial and non-financial incentives could almost double rural job uptake by nurses and midwifes. These packages may provide meaningful attraction strategies to rural areas and should be considered by policy makers for implementation.