A novel approach to estimate the impact of health workforce investments on health outcomes through increased coverage of HIV, TB and malaria services.

BACKGROUND: Globally, HIV, TB and malaria account for an estimated three million deaths annually. The Global Fund partnered with the World Health Organization to assist countries with health workforce planning in these areas through the development of an integrated health workforce investment impact tool. Our study illustrates the development of a user-friendly tool (with two MS Excel calculator subcomponents) that computes associations between human resources for health (HRH) investment inputs and reduced morbidity and mortality from HIV, TB, and malaria via increased coverage of effective treatment services. METHODS: We retrieved from the peer-reviewed literature quantitative estimates of the relation among HRH inputs and HRH employment and productivity. We converted these values to additional full-time-equivalent doctors, nurses and midwives (DNMs). We used log-linear regression to estimate the relation between DNMs and treatment service coverage outcomes for HIV, TB, and malaria. We then retrieved treatment effectiveness parameters from the literature to calculate lives saved due to expanded treatment coverage for HIV, TB, and malaria. After integrating these estimates into the tool, we piloted it in four countries. RESULTS: In most countries with a considerable burden of HIV, TB, and malaria, the health workforce investments include a mix of pre-service education, full remuneration of new hires, various forms of incentives and in-service training. These investments were associated with elevated HIV, TB and malaria treatment service coverage and additional lives saved. The country case studies we developed in addition, indicate the feasibility and utility of the tool for a variety of international and local actors interested in HRH planning. CONCLUSIONS: The modelled estimates developed for illustrative purposes and tested through country case studies suggest that HRH investments result in lives saved across HIV, TB, and malaria. Furthermore, findings show that attainment of high targets of specific treatment coverage indicators would require a substantially greater health workforce than what is currently available in most LMICs. The open access tool can assist with future HRH planning efforts, particularly in LMICs.

Performance-based Financing versus "Unconditional" Direct Facility Financing - False Dichotomy?

A debate about how best to finance essential health care in low- and middle-income settings has been running for decades, with public health systems often failing to provide reliable and adequate funding for primary health care in particular. Since 2000, many have advocated and experimented with performance-based financing as one approach to addressing this problem. More recently, in light of concerns over high transaction costs, mixed results and challenges of sustainability, a less conditional approach, sometimes called direct facility financing, has come into favor. In this commentary, we examine the evidence for the effectiveness of both modalities and argue that they share many features and requirements for effectiveness. In the right context, both can contribute to health system strengthening, and they should be seen as potentially complementary, rather than as rivals.

Epidemiology in conflict - A call to arms.

In this first special theme issue, Emerging Themes in Epidemiology publishes a collection of articles on the theme of Epidemiology in conflict. Violent conflict is an issue of great sensitivity within public health, but more structured research and reasoned discussion will allow us to better mitigate the public health impacts of war, and place the public health community in a more informed position in discussions about possible interventions in future conflicts.

Health systems strengthening: a common classification and framework for investment analysis.

Significant scale-up of donors' investments in health systems strengthening (HSS), and the increased application of harmonization mechanisms for jointly channelling donor resources in countries, necessitate the development of a common framework for tracking donors' HSS expenditures. Such a framework would make it possible to comparatively analyse donors' contributions to strengthening specific aspects of countries' health systems in multi-donor-supported HSS environments. Four pre-requisite factors are required for developing such a framework: (i) harmonization of conceptual and operational understanding of what constitutes HSS; (ii) development of a common set of criteria to define health expenditures as contributors to HSS; (iii) development of a common HSS classification system; and (iv) harmonization of HSS programmatic and financial data to allow for inter-agency comparative analyses. Building on the analysis of these aspects, the paper proposes a framework for tracking donors' investments in HSS, as a departure point for further discussions aimed at developing a commonly agreed approach. Comparative analysis of financial allocations by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and the GAVI Alliance for HSS, as an illustrative example of applying the proposed framework in practice, is also presented.

Promoting health equity in conflict-affected fragile states.

Issues around health equity in conflict-affected fragile states have received very little analysis to date. This paper examines the main factors that threaten health equity, the populations that are most vulnerable and potential strategies to improve health equity. The methods employed are a review of the published and grey literature, key informant interviews and an analysis of data on social determinants of health indicators. A new conceptual framework was developed outlining types of inequity, factors that influence equity and possible strategies to strengthen equity. Factors that affect equity include displacement, gender and financial barriers. Strategies to strengthen health equity include strengthening pro-equity policy and planning functions; building provider capacity to provide health services; and reducing access and participation barriers for excluded groups. In conclusion, conflict is a key social determinant of health. More data is needed to determine how conflict affects within-country and between-country equity, and better evaluated strategies are needed to reduce inequity.

Health Aid governance in fragile states: the global fund experience

Fragile states represent key challenges for global health governance. This study analyzes Global Fund grant data from 122 recipient countries as an initial exploration into how well these grants are performing in fragile states as compared to other countries. Since 2002, the Global Fund has invested nearly US$ 5 billion in 41 fragile states, and most grants have been assessed as performing well. Nonetheless, statistically significant differences in performance exist between fragile states and other countries, which were further pronounced in states with humanitarian crises. This indicates that further investigation of this issue is warranted: variations in performance may be unavoidable given the complexities of health governance in fragile states, but may also have implications for how the Global Fund and others provide aid. For example, faster aid disbursements might allow for a better response to rapidly changing contexts, and there may need to be more of a focus on building capacity and strengthening health governance in these countries.