The reported impact of non-communicable disease investment cases in 13 countries.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are a leading health and development challenge worldwide. Since 2015, WHO and the United Nations Development Programme have provided support to governments to develop national NCD investment cases to describe the socioeconomic dimensions of NCDs. To assess the impact of the investment cases, semistructured interviews and a structured process for gathering written feedback were conducted between July and October 2022 with key informants in 13 countries who had developed a national NCD investment case between 2015 and 2020. Investment cases describe: (1) the social and economic costs of NCDs, including their distribution and projections over time; (2) priority areas for scaled up action; (3) the cost and returns from investing in WHO-recommended measures to prevent and manage NCDs; and (4) the political dimensions of NCD responses. While no country had implemented all the recommendations set out in their investment case reports, actions and policy changes attributable to the investment cases were identified, across (1) governance; (2) financing; and (3) health service access and delivery. The pathways of these changes included: (1) stronger collaboration across government ministries and partners; (2) advocacy for NCD prevention and control; (3) grounding efforts in nationally owned data and evidence; (4) developing mutually embraced 'language' across health and finance; and (5) elevating the priority accorded to NCDs, by framing action as an investment rather than a cost. The assessment also identified barriers to progress on the investment case implementation, including the influence of some private sector entities on sectors other than health, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and changes in senior political and technical government officials. The results suggest that national NCD investment cases can significantly contribute to catalysing the prevention and control of NCDs through strengthening governance, financing, and health service access and delivery.

The integrated management of childhood illness (IMCI) and its potential to reduce the misuse of antibiotics.

BACKGROUND: The Strategy of the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) was introduced in Central Asia and Europe to address the absence of evidence-based guidelines, the misuse of antibiotics, polypharmacy and over-hospitalization of children. A study carried out in 16 countries analysed the status and strengths of as well as the barriers to IMCI implementation and investigated how different health systems affect the problems IMCI aims to address. Here we present findings in relation to IMCI's effects on the rational use of drugs, particularly the improved rational use of antibiotics in children, the mechanisms through which these were achieved as well as counteracting system factors. METHODS: 220 key informants were interviewed ranging from 5 to 37 per country (median 12). Data was analysed for arising themes and peer-reviewed. RESULTS: The implementation of IMCI led to improved prescribing patterns immediately after training of health workers according to key informants. IMCI provides standard treatment guidelines and an algorithmic diagnostic- and treatment-decision-tool for consistent decision-making. Doctors reported feeling empowered by the training to counsel parents and address their expectations and desire for invasive treatments and the use of multiple drugs. Improved prescribing patterns were not sustained over time but counteracted by factors such as: doctors prescribing antibiotics to create additional revenues or other benefits; aggressive marketing by pharmaceutical companies; parents pressuring doctors to prescribe antibiotics; and access to drugs without prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: Future efforts to improve child health outcomes must include: (1) the continued support to improve health worker performance to enable them to adhere to evidence-based treatment guidelines, (2) patient and parent education, (3) improved reimbursement schemes and prescription regulations and their consistent enforcement and (4) the integration of point-of-care tests differentiating between viral and bacterial infection into standards of care. Pre-requisites will be sufficient remuneration of health workers, sound training, improved health literacy among parents, conducive laws and regulations and reimbursement systems with adequate checks and balances to ensure the best possible care.

Review of Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) in 16 countries in Central Asia and Europe: implications for primary healthcare in the era of universal health coverage.

The Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) was introduced in Central Asia and Europe to address the absence of evidence-based guidelines, antibiotics misuse, polypharmacy and overhospitalisation. This study in 16 countries analyses status, strengths of and barriers to IMCI implementation and investigates how health systems affect the problems IMCI aims to address. 220 key informants were interviewed ranging from 5 to 37 per country (median 12). Data were analysed for arising themes and peer-reviewed. IMCI has not been fully used either as a strategy or as an algorithmic diagnostic and treatment decision tool. Inherent incentives include: economic factors taking precedence over evidence and the best interest of the child in treatment decisions; financing mechanisms and payment schemes incentivising unnecessary or prolonged hospitalisation; prescription of drugs other than IMCI drugs for revenue generation or because believed superior by doctors or parents; parents' perception that the quality of care at the primary healthcare level is poor; preference for invasive treatment and medicalised care. Despite the long-standing recognition that supportive health systems are a requirement for IMCI implementation, efforts to address health system barriers have been limited. Making healthcare truly universal for children will require a shift towards health systems designed around and for children and away from systems centred on providers' needs and parents' expectations. Prerequisites will be sufficient remuneration, sound training, improved health literacy among parents, conducive laws and regulations and reimbursement systems with adequate checks and balances to ensure the best possible care.

Prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases in Armenia: the case for investment

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases and their risk factors are an increasing public health and development challenge in Armenia.This report provides evidence through three analyses that NCDs reduce economic output and discusses potential options in response, outlining details of their relative returns on investment. An economic burden analysis shows that economic losses from NCDs (direct and indirect costs) comprise 362.7 billion dram, equivalent to 6.5% of gross domestic product in 2017. An intervention costing analysis provides an estimate of the funding required to implement a set of policy interventions for prevention and clinical interventions.A cost–benefit analysis compares these implementation costs with the estimated health gains and identifies which policy packages would give the greatest returns on investment. For example, the tobacco policy package achieved a return of more than 14.5 dram over 15 years for every 1 dram invested, and for a salt reduction package the equivalent return on investment was more than 14.2 dram for every 1 dram invested.

What is the quality of the maternal near-miss case reviews in WHO European Region? Cross-sectional study in Armenia, Georgia, Latvia, Republic of Moldova and Uzbekistan.

OBJECTIVES: The maternal near-miss case review (NMCR) cycle is a type of clinical audit aiming at improving quality of maternal healthcare by discussing near-miss cases. In several countries this approach has been introduced and supported by WHO and partners since 2004, but information on the quality of its implementation is missing. This study aimed at evaluating the quality of the NMCR implementation in selected countries within WHO European Region. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTINGS: Twenty-three maternity units in Armenia, Georgia, Latvia, Moldova and Uzbekistan. ASSESSMENT TOOLS: A predefined checklist including 50 items, according to WHO methodology. Quality in the NMCR implementation was defined by summary scores ranging from 0 (totally inappropriate) to 3 (appropriate). RESULTS: Quality of the NMCR implementation was heterogeneous among different countries, and within the same country. Overall, the first part of the audit cycle (from case identification to case analysis) was fairly well performed (mean score 2.00, 95% CI 1.94 to 2.06), with the exception of the 'inclusion of users' views' (mean score 0.66, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.22), while the second part (developing recommendations, implementing them and ensuring quality) was poorly performed (mean score 0.66, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.22). Each country had at least one champion facility, where quality of the NMCR cycle was acceptable. Quality of the implementation was not associated with its duration. Gaps in implementation were of technical, organisational and attitudinal nature. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring quality in the NMCR may be difficult but achievable. The high heterogeneity in results within the same country suggests that quality of the NMCR implementation depends, to a large extent, from hospital factors, including staff's commitment, managerial support and local coordination. Efforts should be put in preventing and mitigating common barriers that hamper successful NMCR implementation.