Can service integration work for universal health coverage? Evidence from around the globe

Integration measurement and its applications in low- and middle-income country health systems: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Despite growing interest in and commitment to integration, or integrated care, the concept is ill-defined and the resulting evidence base fragmented, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Underlying this challenge is a lack of coherent approaches to measure the extent of integration and how this influences desired outcomes. The aim of this scoping review is to identify measurement approaches for integration in LMICs and map them for future use.

METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping reviews was followed. We conducted a systematic search of peer-reviewed literature measuring integration in LMICs across three databases and screened identified papers by predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A modified version of the Rainbow Model for Integrated Care guided charting and analysis of the data.

RESULTS

We included 99 studies. Studies were concentrated in the Africa region and most frequently focused on the integration of HIV care with other services. A range of definitions and methods were identified, with no single approach for the measurement of integration dominating the literature. Measurement of clinical integration was the most common, with indicators focused on measuring receipt of two or more services provided at a single point of time. Organizational and professional integration indicators were focused on inter- and intra-organizational communication, collaboration, coordination, and continuity of care, while functional integration measured common information systems or patient records. Gaps were identified in measuring systems and normative integration. Few tools were validated or publicly available for future use.

CONCLUSION

We identified a wide range of recent approaches used to measure integration in LMICs. Our findings underscore continued challenges with lack of conceptual cohesion and fragmentation which limits how integration is understood in practice.

Addressing coloniality of power to improve HIV care in South Africa and other LMIC

We describe the appropriateness and potential for effectiveness of three strategic approaches for improving HIV care in South Africa: community-based primary healthcare, local/community-based stakeholder engagement, and community-engaged research. At their core, these approaches are related to overcoming health inequity and inequality resulting from coloniality of power's heterogenous structural processes impacting health care in many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). We turn to South Africa, a middle-income country, as an example. There the HIV epidemic began in the 1980s and its ending is as elusive as achieving universal healthcare. Despite impressive achievements such as the antiretroviral treatment program (the largest in the world) and the country's outstanding cadre of HIV experts, healthcare workers and leaders, disadvantaged South Africans continue to experience disproportionate rates of HIV transmission. Innovation in global public health must prioritize overcoming the coloniality of power in LMIC, effected through the imposition of development and healthcare models conceived in high-income countries (HIC) and insufficient investment to address social determinants of health. We advocate for a paradigm shift in global health structures and financing to effectively respond to the HIV pandemic in LMIC. We propose ethically responsive, local/community-based stakeholder engagement as a key conceptual approach and strategy to improve HIV care in South Africa and elsewhere. We join in solidarity with local/community-based stakeholders' longstanding efforts and call upon others to change the current status quo characterized by global public health power concentrated in HIC.

Quality of care in the context of universal health coverage: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Universal health coverage (UHC) is an emerging priority of health systems worldwide and central to Sustainable Development Goal 3 (target 3.8). Critical to the achievement of UHC, is quality of care. However, current evidence suggests that quality of care is suboptimal, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. The primary objective of this scoping review was to summarize the existing conceptual and empirical literature on quality of care within the context of UHC and identify knowledge gaps.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley framework and further elaborated by Levac et al. and applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL-Plus, PAIS Index, ProQuest and PsycINFO for reviews published between 1 January 1995 and 27 September 2021. Reviews were eligible for inclusion if the article had a central focus on UHC and discussed quality of care. We did not apply any country-based restrictions. All screening, data extraction and analyses were completed by two reviewers.

RESULTS

Of the 4128 database results, we included 45 studies that met the eligibility criteria, spanning multiple geographic regions. We synthesized and analysed our findings according to Kruk et al.'s conceptual framework for high-quality systems, including foundations, processes of care and quality impacts. Discussions of governance in relation to quality of care were discussed in a high number of studies. Studies that explored the efficiency of health systems and services were also highly represented in the included reviews. In contrast, we found that limited information was reported on health outcomes in relation to quality of care within the context of UHC. In addition, there was a global lack of evidence on measures of quality of care related to UHC, particularly country-specific measures and measures related to equity.

CONCLUSION

There is growing evidence on the relationship between quality of care and UHC, especially related to the governance and efficiency of healthcare services and systems. However, several knowledge gaps remain, particularly related to monitoring and evaluation, including of equity. Further research, evaluation and monitoring frameworks are required to strengthen the existing evidence base to improve UHC.

Outcomes and Challenges in Noncommunicable Disease Care Provision in Health Facilities Supported by Primary Health Care System Strengthening Project in Sri Lanka: A Mixed-Methods Study

The Primary Healthcare System Strengthening Project in Sri Lanka focuses on improving noncommunicable disease (NCD) care provision at primary medical care institutions (PMCIs). We conducted an explanatory mixed-methods study to assess completeness of screening for NCD risk, linkage to care, and outcomes of diabetes/hypertension care at nine selected PMCIs, as well as to understand reasons for gaps. Against a screening coverage target of 50% among individuals aged ≥ 35 years, PMCIs achieved 23.3% (95% CI: 23.0-23.6%) because of a lack of perceived need for screening among the public and COVID-19-related service disruptions. Results of investigations and details of further referral were not documented in almost half of those screened. Post screening, 45% of those eligible for follow-up NCD care were registered at medical clinics. Lack of robust recording/tracking mechanisms and preference for private providers contributed to post-screening attrition. Follow-up biochemical investigations for monitoring complications were not conducted in more than 50% of diabetes/hypertension patients due to nonprescription of investigations by healthcare providers and poor uptake among patients because of nonavailability of investigations at PMCI, requiring them to avail services from the private sector, incurring out-of-pocket expenditure. Primary care strengthening needs to address these challenges to ensure successful integration of NCD care within PMCIs.

Integrated health service delivery during COVID-19: a scoping review of published evidence from low-income and lower-middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Integrated health service delivery (IHSD) is a promising approach to improve health system resilience. However, there is a lack of evidence specific to the low/lower-middle-income country (L-LMIC) health systems on how IHSD is used during disease outbreaks. This scoping review aimed to synthesise the emerging evidence on IHSD approaches adopted in L-LMIC during the COVID-19 pandemic and systematically collate their operational features.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review of peer-reviewed literature, published in English between 1 December 2019 and 12 June 2020, from seven electronic databases was conducted to explore the evidence of IHSD implemented in L-LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were systematically charted, and key features of IHSD systems were presented according to the postulated research questions of the review.

RESULTS

The literature search retrieved 1487 published articles from which 18 articles met the inclusion criteria and included in this review. Service delivery, health workforce, medicine and technologies were the three most frequently integrated health system building blocks during the COVID-19 pandemic. While responding to COVID-19, the L-LMICs principally implemented the IHSD system via systematic horizontal integration, led by specific policy measures. The government's stewardship, along with the decentralised decision-making capacity of local institutions and multisectoral collaboration, was the critical facilitator for IHSD. Simultaneously, fragmented service delivery structures, fragile supply chain, inadequate diagnostic capacity and insufficient workforce were key barriers towards integration.

CONCLUSION

A wide array of context-specific IHSD approaches were operationalised in L-LMICs during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging recommendations emphasise the importance of coordination and integration across building blocks and levels of the health system, supported by a responsive governance structure and stakeholder engagement strategies. Future reviews can revisit this emerging evidence base at subsequent phases of COVID-19 response and recovery in L-LMICs to understand how the approaches highlighted here evolve.

Evidence of integrated primary-secondary health care in low-and middle-income countries: protocol for a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Integrated care is a people-centered health delivery approach that ensures the comprehensiveness, quality, and continuity of service across the settings and levels of health systems. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends integration across levels and building-blocks of health systems as a prerequisite of Universal Health Coverage (UHC). While health systems of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are often fragmented and led by siloed service delivery structure, several LMICs-including India-have attempted health system integration. Several systematic reviews of evidence on healthcare integration from developed countries exist, but no synthesis from LMICs was reported to date. This review will overview the existing evidence of primary-secondary care integration (PSI) in the context of LMICs, aiming to support policy decisions for the effective integration of health delivery systems in India.

METHODS

The review will be conducted following the six steps recommend by Arksey and O'Malley. Scientific and grey literature will be systematically selected from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, and electronic repositories (such as WHO, World Bank, Health Policy Plus, and OpenGrey). Using a comprehensive search strategy, literature written in English and published between 2000 and 2020 will be selected, and two independent authors will screen their titles and abstracts. The result will be charted using a data extraction form and reported using tables, figures, and narrative forms.

DISCUSSION

No ethical approval is necessary for the review. The final report will be developed with the consultation of other stakeholders and disseminated through workshops, conference papers, and peer review articles. The review will serve as a guiding tool to approach, implement, and test the PSI models in India and other LMICs. SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/kjhzt .

Integrated care experiences and out-of-pocket expenditures: a cross-sectional survey of adults receiving treatment for HIV and hypertension in Malawi

OBJECTIVES

As HIV-positive individuals' life expectancy extends, there is an urgent need to manage other chronic conditions during HIV care. We assessed the care-seeking experiences and costs of adults receiving treatment for both HIV and hypertension in Malawi.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted with HIV-positive adults with hypertension at a health facility in Lilongwe that offers free HIV care and free hypertension screening, with antihypertensives available for purchase (n=199). Questions included locations and costs of all medication refills and preferences for these refill locations. Respondents were classified as using 'integrated care' if they refilled HIV and antihypertensive medications simultaneously. Data were collected between June and December 2017.

RESULTS

Only half of respondents reported using the integrated care offered at the study site. Among individuals using different locations for antihypertensive medication refills, the most frequent locations were drug stores and public sector health facilities which were commonly selected due to greater convenience and lower medication costs. Although the number of antihypertensive medications was equivalent between the integrated and non-integrated care groups, the annual total cost of care differed substantially (approximately US$21 in integrated care vs US$90 for non-integrated care)-mainly attributable to differences in other visit costs for non-integrated care (transportation, lost wages, childcare). One-third of those in the non-integrated care group reported no expenditure for antihypertensive medication, and six people in each group reported no annual hypertension care-seeking costs at all.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals using integrated care saw efficiencies because, although they were more likely to pay for antihypertensive medications, they did not incur additional costs. These results suggest that preferences and experiences must be better understood to design effective policies and programmes for integrated care among adults on antiretroviral therapy.

Tailored HIV programmes and universal health coverage

Improvements in geospatial health data and tailored human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing, prevention and treatment have led to greater microtargeting of the HIV response, based on location, risk, clinical status and disease burden. These approaches show promise for achieving control of the HIV epidemic. At the same time, United Nations Member States have committed to achieving broader health and development goals by 2030, including universal health coverage (UHC). HIV epidemic control will facilitate UHC by averting the need to commit ever-increasing resources to HIV services. Yet an overly targeted HIV response could also distort health systems, impede integration and potentially threaten broader health goals. We discuss current approaches to achieving both UHC and HIV epidemic control, noting potential areas of friction between disease-specific microtargeting and integrated health systems, and highlighting opportunities for convergence that could enhance both initiatives. Examples of these programmatic elements that could be better aligned include: improved information systems with unique identifiers to track and monitor individuals across health services and the life course; strengthened subnational data use; more accountable supply chains that supply a broad range of services; and strengthened community-based services and workforces. We argue that the response both to HIV and to broader health threats should use these areas of convergence to increase health systems efficiency and mitigate the harm of any potential decrease in health funding. Further investments in implementation and monitoring of these programme elements will be needed to make progress towards both UHC and HIV epidemic control.

Primary healthcare system performance in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review of the evidence from 2010 to 2017

INTRODUCTION

The 2018 Astana Declaration reaffirmed global commitment to primary healthcare (PHC) as a core strategy to achieve universal health coverage. To meet this potential, PHC in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) needs to be strengthened, but research is lacking and fragmented. We conducted a scoping review of the recent literature to assess the state of research on PHC in LMIC and understand where future research is most needed.

METHODS

Guided by the Primary Healthcare Performance Initiative (PHCPI) conceptual framework, we conducted searches of the peer-reviewed literature on PHC in LMIC published between 2010 (the publication year of the last major review of PHC in LMIC) and 2017. We also conducted country-specific searches to understand performance trajectories in 14 high-performing countries identified in the previous review. Evidence highlights and gaps for each topic area of the PHCPI framework were extracted and summarised.

RESULTS

We retrieved 5219 articles, 207 of which met final inclusion criteria. Many PHC system inputs such as payment and workforce are well-studied. A number of emerging service delivery innovations have early evidence of success but lack evidence for how to scale more broadly. Community-based PHC systems with supportive governmental policies and financing structures (public and private) consistently promote better outcomes and equity. Among the 14 highlighted countries, most maintained or improved progress in the scope of services, quality, access and financial coverage of PHC during the review time period.

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed a heterogeneous focus of recent literature, with ample evidence for effective PHC policies, payment and other system inputs. More variability was seen in key areas of service delivery, underscoring a need for greater emphasis on implementation science and intervention testing. Future evaluations are needed on PHC system capacities and orientation toward social accountability, innovation, management and population health in order to achieve the promise of PHC.

Professional identity in interprofessional teams: findings from a scoping review

Integrated care has been identified as being fundamental to health and social care reforms. How this interprofessional working impacts on professional identity is unclear. There is a lack of reviews synthesising this growing body of literature. It is therefore timely to conduct a scoping study of the literature which explores the intersection between interprofessional care and professional identity. The aim of this study is to identify the factors that impact on professional identity when working in interprofessional teams. A scoping review was conducted; Business Source Complete (EBSCO); CINAHL; Proquest; Medline; Scopus; and Cochrane Reviews (January 1980 to July 2018) were systematically searched for studies focusing on professional identity and interprofessional teams. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified and applied, data were charted, and a synthesis of the narrative was conducted. Sixteen papers are identified as central to this scoping review. Analysis of the papers highlights three key areas of interest: the creation of professional identity; challenges and barriers to professional identity; and implications for leadership and management. The significance of this review is considered along with an agenda for future research. Expanding the research to include more empirical studies to consider areas such as the value of interprofessional education programmes and to include the voice of those professionals no longer working or choosing not to work in an interprofessional care setting should also feature within future research.

International experiments with different models of allocating funds to facilitate integrated care: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Integrated care is viewed widely as a potential solution to some of the major challenges faced by health and social care systems, such as those posed by service duplication, fragmentation and poor care coordination, and associated impacts on the quality and cost of services. Fragmented models of allocating funds to and across sectors, programmes and providers are frequently cited as a major barrier to integration and countries have experimented with different models of allocating funds to enhance care coordination among service providers and to reduce ineffective care and avoid costly adverse events. This scoping review aims to assess published international experiences of different models of allocating funds to facilitate integration and the evidence on their impacts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will adopt a scoping review methodology due to the potentially vast and multidisciplinary nature of the literature on different models of allocating funds in health and social care systems, as well as the scarcity of existing knowledge syntheses. The framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley will be followed that entails six steps: (1) identifying the research question(s), (2) searching for relevant studies, (3) selecting studies, (4) charting the data, (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results and (6) and conducting consultation exercises. These steps will be conducted iteratively and reflexively, making adjustments and repetitions when appropriate to make sure the literature has been covered as comprehensively as possible. To ensure comprehensiveness of our literature review, we also search a wide range of sources.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

An integrated knowledge translation strategy will be pursued by engaging our knowledge users through all stages of the review. We will organise two workshops or policy roundtables/policy dialogues in Alberta and British Columbia with participation of diverse knowledge users to discuss and interpret the findings of our review and to draw out policy opportunities and lessons that can be applied to the context of these two provinces.

Integrating a diabetes and hypertension case management package within primary health care: a mixed methods feasibility study in Bangladesh

Background

Almost three quarters of non-communicable disease (NCD) deaths, and 82% of premature NCD deaths, occur in low- and middle-income countries. Bangladesh has an estimated 7 million hypertensives and 10 million diabetics, and primary care is struggling to respond. Our aim was to develop and support implementation of a diabetes and hypertension case management package, and assess its appropriateness, feasibility and acceptability in two NCD clinics within two primary-care centres in Bangladesh.

Methods

We used a convergent mixed methods design. We first assessed the level of appropriate hypertension and cardiovascular disease patient management, based on a composite outcome indicator using data from patients’ treatment cards. Appropriate management was primarily informed by International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines. We then performed qualitative in-depth interviews with doctors and patients to explain these quantitative findings and to understand the challenges to achieving appropriate patient management in the NCD clinics.

Results

Eighty-one newly diagnosed patients were recruited. Over 3 months, 53.1% (95% CI 42.3% to 63.6%) of patients were appropriately managed. We found incomplete diagnosis (especially missing hypertension diagnosis alongside diabetes) and non-provision of follow-up appointments were the main causes of the relatively low level of appropriate management. We conducted interviews with 11 patients and 8 health professionals and found a shortage of human resources, reporting materials, available drugs and diagnostic equipment. This undermined patients’ willingness to attend clinics and doctors’ willingness to offer follow-ups. Hands-on skill-building training was valuable in increasing doctors’ competence for appropriate management, but was seen as a novel training method and faced constraints to implementation.

Conclusions

A clinical guide, skill-based training and recording package can be implemented in routine primary care and can lead to appropriate management of around half of diabetic and hypertensive patients in a low-income country. However, considerable health systems challenges must be addressed before more patients can be managed appropriately.

Integrated care: mobilising professional identity

Purpose Integrated care has been identified as essential to delivering the reforms required in health and social care across the UK and other healthcare systems. Given this suggests new ways of working for health and social care professionals, little research has considered how different professions manage and mobilise their professional identity (PI) whilst working in an integrated team. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative cross-sectional study was designed using eight focus groups with community-based health and social care practitioners from across Wales in the UK during 2017. Findings Participants reported key factors influencing practice were communication, goal congruence and training. The key characteristics of PI for that enabled integrated working were open mindedness, professional trust, scope of practice and uniqueness. Blurring of boundaries was found to enable and hinder integrated working. Research limitations/implications This research was conducted in the UK which limits the geographic coverage of the study. Nevertheless, the insight provided on PI and integrated teams is relevant to other healthcare systems. Practical implications This study codifies for health and social care practitioners the enabling and inhibiting factors that influence PI when working in integrated teams. Originality/value Recommendations in terms of how healthcare professionals manage and mobilise their PI when working in integrated teams are somewhat scarce. This paper identifies the key factors that influence PI which could impact the performance of integrated teams and ultimately, patient care.

International guidelines for groin hernia management

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results. The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia repair. They have been endorsed by all five continental hernia societies, the International Endo Hernia Society and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

METHODS

An expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform different types of repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group's first meeting, evidence-based medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1 publications. The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, SIGN and Grade methodologies. During five 2-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group members leading to 136 statements and 88 recommendations. Recommendations were graded as "strong" (recommendations) or "weak" (suggestions) and by consensus in some cases upgraded. In the Results and summary section below, the term "should" refers to a recommendation. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An external review was performed by three international experts. They recommended the guidelines with high scores. The risk factors for inguinal hernia (IH) include: family history, previous contra-lateral hernia, male gender, age, abnormal collagen metabolism, prostatectomy, and low body mass index. Peri-operative risk factors for recurrence include poor surgical techniques, low surgical volumes, surgical inexperience and local anesthesia. These should be considered when treating IH patients. IH diagnosis can be confirmed by physical examination alone in the vast majority of patients with appropriate signs and symptoms. Rarely, ultrasound is necessary. Less commonly still, a dynamic MRI or CT scan or herniography may be needed. The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with "watchful waiting" since their risk of hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon's expertise, patient- and hernia-related characteristics and local/national resources. Furthermore, patient health-related, life style and social factors should all influence the shared decision-making process leading up to hernia management. Mesh repair is recommended as first choice, either by an open procedure or a laparo-endoscopic repair technique. One standard repair technique for all groin hernias does not exist. It is recommended that surgeons/surgical services provide both anterior and posterior approach options. Lichtenstein and laparo-endoscopic repair are best evaluated. Many other techniques need further evaluation. Provided that resources and expertise are available, laparo-endoscopic techniques have faster recovery times, lower chronic pain risk and are cost effective. There is discussion concerning laparo-endoscopic management of potential bilateral hernias (occult hernia issue). After patient consent, during TAPP, the contra-lateral side should be inspected. This is not suggested during unilateral TEP repair. After appropriate discussions with patients concerning results tissue repair (first choice is the Shouldice technique) can be offered. Day surgery is recommended for the majority of groin hernia repair provided aftercare is organized. Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called low-weight mesh may have slight short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. The incidence of erosion seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair techniques. The use of other implants to replace the standard flat mesh in the Lichtenstein technique is currently not recommended. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk. Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended in open surgery. In laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended. Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages, and its use is recommended provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique. General anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients aged 65 and older as it might be associated with fewer complications like myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism. Perioperative field blocks and/or subfascial/subcutaneous infiltrations are recommended in all cases of open repair. Patients are recommended to resume normal activities without restrictions as soon as they feel comfortable. Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-endoscopic repair in order to decrease the risk of chronic pain and avoid missing a femoral hernia. Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available. All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic. Overall, the incidence of clinically significant chronic pain is in the 10-12% range, decreasing over time. Debilitating chronic pain affecting normal daily activities or work ranges from 0.5 to 6%. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities lasting at least 3 months postoperatively and decreasing over time. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. For CPIP the focus should be on nerve recognition in open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (planned resection is not suggested). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams. It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases (triple) neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal. For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior approach, management by a specialist hernia surgeon is recommended. Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and resources. Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein. It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia surgeon. The same is true for the designation "Hernia Center". From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of disposables is recommended. The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures. A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global (HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through internet websites, social media and smartphone apps. An overarching plan to improve access to safe IH surgery in low-resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy, independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh. Three chapters discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and guidelines for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for groin hernia patients wherever they live. More knowledge, better training, national audit and specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.

Answering the call to accessible quality health care for all using a new model of local community not-for-profit charity clinics: A return to Christ-centered care of the past

This article uses studies and organizational trends to understand available solutions to the lack of quality health care access, especially for the poor and needy of local U.S. communities. The U.S. healthcare system seems to be moving toward the World Health Organization's recommendation for universal health coverage for healthcare sustainability. Healthcare trends and offered solutions are varied. Christian healthcare traditionally implements works of mercy guided by a Christian ethos embracing the teachings of human dignity, solidarity, the common good, and subsidiarity. Culture of Life Ministries is one of many new sustainable U.S. healthcare models which implements Christ-centered health care to meet the need of quality and accessible health care for the local community. Culture of Life Ministries employs a model of charity care through volunteerism. Volunteer workers not only improve but also transform the local healthcare system into a personal healing ministry of the highest quality for every person. Summary: The lack of access to quality health care is a common problem in the U.S. despite various solutions offered through legislative and socioeconomic works: universal healthcare models, insurance models, and other business models. U.S. health care would be best transformed by returning to the implementation of a traditional system founded on the Christian principles of human dignity, solidarity, subsidiarity, and the common good. Culture of Life Ministries is an example of such a local ministry in Texas, which has found success in practically applying these Christ-centered, healthcare principles into an emerging not-for-profit, economically sustainable, healthcare model.

Integrated Care: A Pill for All Ills?

There is an increasing policy emphasis on the integration of care, both within the healthcare sector and also between the health and social care sectors, with the simple aim of ensuring that individuals get the right care, in the right place, at the right time. However, implementing this simple aim is rather more complex. In this editorial, we seek to make sense of this complexity and ask: what does integrated care mean in practice? What are the mechanisms by which it is expected to achieve its aim? And what is the nature of the evidence base around the outcomes delivered?