Setting up a patient complaint system in the national primary healthcare network in Lebanon (2016-2020): Lessons for Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Over the past decade there has been a renewed global commitment towards building people-centred healthcare systems and enhancing the capture of patient complaints. Literature from Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) on patient complaints is sparse. In 2016, the Primary Healthcare (PHC) Department at the Ministry of Public Health in Lebanon, developed a full grievance (complaint or inquiry) redress system. This paper aims to describe the development of the national grievance handling system and analyse 5 years' worth of grievance data (2016-2020). The study entailed a retrospective analysis of grievances relating to the care of patients treated in 237 Primary Health Centres in the national PHC network in Lebanon, lodged through the central grievance uptakes channels between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020. Between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020, the PHC Department at the ministry of health received 562 grievances from a total of 389 unique beneficiaries Management issues made up an overwhelming 70% of all grievances, followed by relationships (20%) and clinical issues (6%). Findings indicate the need to enhance the healthcare administration, monitoring and workflow at the PHC centres and to promote the utilisation of grievance systems. The study outlines lessons learned for building grievance systems in LMICs.

Lebanon's essential health care benefit package: A gateway for universal health coverage.

Recent years have demonstrated the resurgence of a global commitment toward universal health coverage (UHC). The first step toward developing a sustainable primary health care (PHC)-oriented UHC program is the creation and service delivery of an explicit essential health care benefit package (EHCP). This paper aims to describe the development, features, and progress of the EHCP in Lebanon, in addition to outlining barriers, facilitators, and next steps. Building on the investments made in the PHC network, the ministry of public health in Lebanon piloted an essential PHC package program in 2016 targeting vulnerable Lebanese and was able to enroll over 87% of targeted population to date. In order to scale up the EHCP to the national level and achieve UHC, modifications need to be made to the package entitlements, provider payment mechanisms, and implementation arrangements. The paper also notes that further advocacy and lobbying are needed in order to place UHC and the EHCP on the national agenda and stimulate public demand.

Patient satisfaction with primary healthcare services in Lebanon.

BACKGROUND: Reorienting the model of care towards preventive services is integral to successfully move towards a people-centered healthcare system. Patient satisfaction is an essential component of people-centered care and an important quality of care indicator. In its efforts to strengthen primary healthcare, the Ministry of Public Health in Lebanon assessed patient satisfaction with services offered at primary healthcare centers (PHCCs) and explored the relationship between patient satisfaction and patient characteristics and accreditation. METHODOLOGY: The study followed a cross-sectional design. A survey was administered through phone calls with 1313 patients receiving services as part of a benefits package provided by 59 PHCCs. The survey collected data on patients' sociodemographic characteristics, perceptions, and satisfaction. RESULTS: Overall, 96.66% of surveyed patients reported being either satisfied (60.23%) or very satisfied (36.43%) with the services provided at the PHCCs. Patients' perceptions of patient-provider communication, healthcare provider competency, and health education quality constituted strong predictors for satisfaction. However, facilities' accreditation status was not associated with satisfaction with PHC services. CONCLUSION: Patient satisfaction with primary healthcare services in Lebanon was remarkably high. Findings highlighted the need for quality improvement particularly in health education and the alignment of accreditation standards with patient needs and expectations.

The SPARK Tool to prioritise questions for systematic reviews in health policy and systems research: development and initial validation.

BACKGROUND: Groups or institutions funding or conducting systematic reviews in health policy and systems research (HPSR) should prioritise topics according to the needs of policymakers and stakeholders. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a tool to prioritise questions for systematic reviews in HPSR. METHODS: We developed the tool following a four-step approach consisting of (1) the definition of the purpose and scope of tool, (2) item generation and reduction, (3) testing for content and face validity, (4) and pilot testing of the tool. The research team involved international experts in HPSR, systematic review methodology and tool development, led by the Center for Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Systems Research (SPARK). We followed an inclusive approach in determining the final selection of items to allow customisation to the user's needs. RESULTS: The purpose of the SPARK tool was to prioritise questions in HPSR in order to address them in systematic reviews. In the item generation and reduction phase, an extensive literature search yielded 40 relevant articles, which were reviewed by the research team to create a preliminary list of 19 candidate items for inclusion in the tool. As part of testing for content and face validity, input from international experts led to the refining, changing, merging and addition of new items, and to organisation of the tool into two modules. Following pilot testing, we finalised the tool, with 22 items organised in two modules - the first module including 13 items to be rated by policymakers and stakeholders, and the second including 9 items to be rated by systematic review teams. Users can customise the tool to their needs, by omitting items that may not be applicable to their settings. We also developed a user manual that provides guidance on how to use the SPARK tool, along with signaling questions. CONCLUSION: We have developed and conducted initial validation of the SPARK tool to prioritise questions for systematic reviews in HPSR, along with a user manual. By aligning systematic review production to policy priorities, the tool will help support evidence-informed policymaking and reduce research waste. We invite others to contribute with additional real-life implementation of the tool.

Systematic reviews addressing identified health policy priorities in Eastern Mediterranean countries: a situational analysis.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews can offer policymakers and stakeholders concise, transparent, and relevant evidence pertaining to pressing policy priorities to help inform the decision-making process. The production and the use of systematic reviews are specifically limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities in the region is still unknown. This situational analysis exercise aims at assessing the extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities identified by policymakers and stakeholders in Eastern Mediterranean region countries. It also provides an overview about the state of systematic review production in the region and identifies knowledge gaps. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of the Health System Evidence database to identify published systematic reviews on policy-relevant priorities pertaining to the following themes: human resources for health, health financing, the role of the non-state sector, and access to medicine. Priorities were identified from two priority-setting exercises conducted in the region. We described the distribution of these systematic reviews across themes, sub-themes, authors' affiliations, and countries where included primary studies were conducted. RESULTS: Out of the 1,045 systematic reviews identified in Health System Evidence on selected themes, a total of 200 systematic reviews (19.1%) addressed the priorities from the Eastern Mediterranean region. The theme with the largest number of systematic reviews included was human resources for health (115) followed by health financing (33), access to medicine (27), and role of the non-state sector (25). Authors based in the region produced only three systematic reviews addressing regional priorities (1.5%). Furthermore, no systematic review focused on the Eastern Mediterranean region. Primary studies from the region had limited contribution to systematic reviews; 17 systematic reviews (8.5%) included primary studies conducted in the region. CONCLUSIONS: There are still gaps in the production of systematic reviews addressing policymakers' and stakeholders' priorities in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Efforts should be directed towards better aligning systematic review production with policy needs and priorities. Study findings can inform the agendas of researchers, research institutions, and international funding agencies of priority areas where systematic reviews are required.

Has the COVID-19 pandemic changed the utilization and provision of essential health care services from 2019 to 2020 in the primary health care network in Lebanon? Results from a nationwide representative cross-sectional survey.

There is limited research soliciting the patient and staff perspectives on the overall effects of COVID-19 on the utilization and provision of primary care in Lebanon. The present study was part of a larger study on the overall effect of COVID-19 on both utilization and provision of essential health care services within the Lebanese primary health care network (PHCN). Here, we present the patient and staff perspectives on continuity of service provision, adherence to infection prevention and control measures, and the role of the PHCN in epidemic preparedness and response. We conducted a cross-sectional survey between June and July 2021 among patients who had received a health care service in 2019 or 2020 from registered primary healthcare centers (PHCs) in the network and among the respective PHC staff working during the same period. A total of 763 patients and 198 staff completed the surveys. Services were reported as interrupted by 15% of the total patients who used services either in 2020 only or in both 2019 and 2020. Access to chronic (67%) and acute medications (40%) were reported as the main interrupted services. Immunization also emerged as a foregone service in 2020. Among the staff, one third (33%) reported interruptions in the provision of services. Financial barriers rather than fear of COVID-19 were reported as main reasons for interruption. Both groups considered that the facilities implemented adequate infection prevention and control measures. They perceived that the PHCN maintained some essential healthcare services and that it should have played a bigger role in the response to the pandemic. There was a continuity in utilization and provision of services in the PHCN that was higher than expected, with non-communicable diseases and immunizations suffering more than other services.

Working short and working long: can primary healthcare be protected as a public good in Lebanon today?

In this commentary we propose four questions to be addressed while building a meaningful public primary healthcare response in Lebanon today. These questions emerge from two imperatives: the necessity to consider both short- and longer-term struggles in a context of protracted conflict and the need to protect public health as a public good whilst the public Primary Healthcare Network (PHCN) is facing the Covid19 pandemic. In order to identify how these questions are related to the need to be working short and long, we look at the imprints left by past and present shocks. Profound shocks of the past include the Lebanese civil war and the Syrian refugee crisis. We analyse how these shocks have resulted in the PHCN developing resilience mechanisms in order to ensure a space for healthcare provision that stands public in Lebanon today. Then, we consider how two present shocks -- the economic breakdown and the blast of ammonium nitrate in Beirut port -- are affecting and threatening the progress made by the PHCN to ensure that primary healthcare remains a public good, a fragile space acquired with difficulty in the past half century. We identify what questions emerge from the combined consequences of such traumas, when the immediate constraints of the present meet the impediments of the past. We consider what such questions mean more broadly, for the people living in Lebanon today, and for the PHCN ability to respond to the Covid 19 pandemic in a relevant way. Our hypothesis is that in a protracted conflict, such as the one defining the circumstances of Lebanon now, public access to primary healthcare might persist for the people as one safeguard, in which social and moral continuity can be anchored to protect a sense of public good.

The primary healthcare network in Lebanon: a national facility assessment.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of material and human resources, as well as services at healthcare facilities can further our understanding of their capacity to adapt to a people-centred framework. AIMS: To assess health infrastructure, drugs, equipment and human resources in primary healthcare centres (PHCCs) within the Lebanese National Primacy Healthcare Network. METHODS: The study surveyed all 212 primary healthcare centres in the network to assess services, as well as material and human resource availability. The survey was developed by the Ministry of Public Health and administered at each PHCC through face-to-face interviews with the facilities' directors. Data collection took place between December 2017 and January 2018. Descriptive statistics and χ² tests were used to analyse the collected data. RESULTS: The majority of PHCCs in the network delivered all services required by the national standards (78%), and had all basic equipment necessary for the delivery of care (89%), in addition to viable means of communication (85%). However, there was a significant shortage of family medicine physicians and nurses. Bivariate analysis highlighted regional disparities between urban and rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: This study can further our understanding of the capacity and ability of healthcare facilities to adapt to a people-centred framework. It provides baseline data that will inform Lebanon in its efforts to strengthen primary health care, and assist donors and local and international nongovernmental organizations in planning interventions and programmes, and better allocation of financial support.

Health system resilience: Lebanon and the Syrian refugee crisis.

BACKGROUND: Between 2011 and 2013, the Lebanese population increased by 30% due to the influx of Syrian refugees. While a sudden increase of such magnitude represents a shock to the health system, threatening the continuity of service delivery and destabilizing governance, it also offers a unique opportunity to study resilience of a health system amidst ongoing crisis. METHODS: We conceptualized resilience as the capacity of a health system to absorb internal or external shocks (for example prevent or contain disease outbreaks and maintain functional health institutions) while sustaining achievements. We explored factors contributing to the resilience of the Lebanese health system, including networking with stakeholders, diversification of the health system, adequate infrastructure and health human resources, a comprehensive communicable disease response and the integration of the refugees within the health system. RESULTS: In studying the case of Lebanon we used input-process-output-outcome approach to assess the resilience of the Lebanese health system. This approach provided us with a holistic view of the health system, as it captured not only the sustained and improved outcomes, but also the inputs and processes leading to them. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that the Lebanese health system was resilient as its institutions sustained their performance during the crisis and even improved.

Health Reporting in Print Media in Lebanon: Evidence, Quality and Role in Informing Policymaking.

BACKGROUND: Media plays a vital role in shaping public policies and opinions through disseminating health-related information. This study aims at exploring the role of media in informing health policies in Lebanon, identifying the factors influencing health reporting and investigating the role of evidence in health journalism and the quality of health reporting. It also identifies strategies to enhance the use of evidence in health journalism and improve the quality of health reporting. METHODS: Media analysis was conducted to assess the way media reports on health-related issues and the quality of reporting using a quality assessment tool. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with 27 journalists, researchers and policymakers to explore their perception on the role of media in health policymaking and the factors influencing health reporting. In addition, a validation workshop was conducted. RESULTS: Out of 1,279 health-related news articles identified, 318 articles used certain type of evidence to report health issues 39.8% of which relied on experts' opinions as their source of evidence while only 5.9% referenced peer-reviewed research studies. The quality of health reporting was judged to be low based on a quality assessment tool consisting of a set of ten criteria. Journalists raised concerns about issues impeding them from referring to evidence. Journalists also reported difficulties with the investigative health journalism. Policymakers and researchers viewed media as an important tool for evidence-informed health policies, however, serious concerns were voiced in terms of the current practice and capacities. CONCLUSION: Our study provides a structured reflection on the role of media and the factors that influence health reporting including context-specific strategies that would enhance the quality and promote the use of evidence in health reporting. In the light of the political changes in many Middle Eastern countries, findings from this study can contribute to redefining the role of media in strengthening health systems.