Investing in Operational Research Capacity Building for Front-Line Health Workers Strengthens Countries' Resilience to Tackling the COVID-19 Pandemic

Covid-19 vaccination: a mixed methods analysis of health system resilience in Latin America

BACKGROUND

This paper discusses the stages of health system resilience (HSR) and the factors underlying differences in HSR during the covid-19 pandemic, especially the vaccination challenge. We studied the relationship between vaccination strategies and macro-context backgrounds in 21 Latin American countries. Our objective was to capture the impact of those aspects in the SR and identify potential improvements for future crises and for vaccination programs in general.

METHODS

The study uses mixed-methods research to provide insights into how the countries' backgrounds and vaccination strategies impact the HSR. Particularly, we used explanatory sequential mixed methods, which entails a quantitative-qualitative two-phase sequence. The quantitative phase was conducted using cluster and variance analysis, in which the HSR was measured using as a proxy the covid-19 vaccination outcomes in three cut-offs of reaching 25%, 50%, and 75% of population coverage. This approach allows us to discriminate covid-19 vaccination progress by stages and contrast it to the qualitative stage, in which we performed a country-case analysis of the background conditions and the changes in vaccination strategies that occurred during the corresponding dates.

RESULTS

The paper provides a rich comparative case analysis of countries, classifying them by early, prompt, and delayed performers. The results show that differences in vaccination performance are due to flexibility in adapting strategies, cooperation, and the ability to design multilevel solutions that consider the needs of various actors in the health ecosystem. These differences vary depending on the vaccination stage, which suggests the importance of acknowledging learning, diffusion, and feedback processes at the regional level.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified the importance of societal well-being as an ideal country antecedent for high and sustained levels of performance in covid-19 vaccination. Whereas in other countries where the set-up and beginning phases were rough, the value of the operational decisions and the learning on the move regarding their own and their peers' trajectories were crucial and were reflected in performance improvement. A contribution of this study is that the above-mentioned analysis was done using vaccination coverage cut-off points that allow a performance view that takes into consideration the stages of the vaccination progress and the learning process that goes with it. As well as framing this into the HSR shock cycles that allow to differentiate the stages of resilience on which countries must act.

Monitoring and evaluation practices and operational research during public health emergencies in southeast Asia region (2012-2022) - a systematic review

This systematic review aimed to explore the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and operational research (OR) practices during public health emergencies (PHE) in the southeast Asian region (SEAR) over the last decade. We searched electronic databases and grey literature sources for studies published between 2012 and 2022. The studies written in English were included, and a narrative synthesis was undertaken. A total of 29 studies were included in this review. Among these 25 studies documented M&E and four studies documented OR practices. The majority of the studies were from India and Bangladesh, with no evidence found from Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Myanmar, and Timor-Leste. M&E of surveillance programs were identified among which PHE due to COVID-19 was most prevalent. M&E was conducted in response to COVID-19, cholera, Nipah, Ebola, Candida auris, and hepatitis A. OR practice was minimal and reported from India and Indonesia. India conducted OR on COVID-19 and malaria, whereas Indonesia focused on COVID-19 and influenza. While most SEAR countries have mechanisms for conducting M&E, there is a noticeable limitation in OR practices. There is a compelling need to develop a standard framework for M&E. Additionally, enhancing private sector engagement is crucial for strengthening preparedness against PHE. Furthermore, there is a necessity to increase awareness about the importance of conducting M&E and OR during PHE.

Effects of COVID-19 on sexual and reproductive health services access in the Asia-Pacific region: a qualitative study of expert and policymaker perspectives

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained health systems globally, with governments imposing strict distancing and movement restrictions. Little is known about the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on sexual and reproductive health (SRH). This study examined perceived effects of COVID-19 on SRH service provision and use in the Asia-Pacific region. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 28 purposively sampled SRH experts in 12 Asia-Pacific countries (e.g. United Nations, international and national non-governmental organisations, ministries of health, academia) between November 2020 and January 2021. We analysed data using the six-stage thematic analysis approach proposed by Braun and Clarke (2019). Interviewees reported that COVID-19 mitigation measures, such as transport restrictions and those that decreased the availability of personal protective equipment (PPE), reduced SRH service provision and use in most countries. SRH needs related to service barriers and gender-based violence increased. Systemic challenges included fragmented COVID-19 response plans and insufficient communication and collaboration, particularly between public and private sectors. SRH service-delivery challenges included COVID-19 response prioritisation, e.g. SRH staff task-shifting to COVID-19 screening and contact tracing, and lack of necessary supplies and equipment. Innovative SRH delivery responses included door-to-door antenatal care and family planning provision in the Philippines, online platforms for SRH education and outreach in Viet Nam, and increasing SRH service engagement through social media in Myanmar and Indonesia. To ensure continuation of SRH services during health emergencies, governments should earmark human and financial resources and prioritise frontline health-worker safety; work with communities and the private sector; and develop effective risk communications.

A resilience view on health system resilience: a scoping review of empirical studies and reviews

BACKGROUND

Prompted by recent shocks and stresses to health systems globally, various studies have emerged on health system resilience. Our aim is to describe how health system resilience is operationalised within empirical studies and previous reviews. We compare these to the core conceptualisations and characteristics of resilience in a broader set of domains (specifically, engineering, socio-ecological, organisational and community resilience concepts), and trace the different schools, concepts and applications of resilience across the health literature.

METHODS

We searched the Pubmed database for concepts related to 'resilience' and 'health systems'. Two separate analyses were conducted for included studies: a total of n = 87 empirical studies on health system resilience were characterised according to part of health systems covered, type of threat, resilience phase, resilience paradigm, and approaches to building resilience; and a total of n = 30 reviews received full-text review and characterised according to type of review, resilience concepts identified in the review, and theoretical framework or underlying resilience conceptualisation.

RESULTS

The intersection of health and resilience clearly has gained importance in the academic discourse with most papers published since 2018 in a variety of journals and in response to external threats, or in reference to more frequent hospital crisis management. Most studies focus on either resilience of health systems generally (and thereby responding to an external shock or stress), or on resilience within hospitals (and thereby to regular shocks and operations). Less attention has been given to community-based and primary care, whether formal or informal. While most publications do not make the research paradigm explicit, 'resilience engineering' is the most prominent one, followed by 'community resilience' and 'organisational resilience'. The social-ecological systems roots of resilience find the least application, confirming our findings of the limited application of the concept of transformation in the health resilience literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that the field is fragmented, especially in the use of resilience paradigms and approaches from non-health resilience domains, and the health system settings in which these are used. This fragmentation and siloed approach can be problematic given the connections within and between the complex and adaptive health systems, ranging from community actors to local, regional, or national public health organisations to secondary care. Without a comprehensive definition and framework that captures these interdependencies, operationalising, measuring and improving resilience remains challenging.

Metrics and indicators used to assess health system resilience in response to shocks to health systems in high income countries-A systematic review

Health system resilience has never been more important than with the COVID-19 pandemic. There is need to identify feasible measures of resilience, potential strategies to build resilience and weaknesses of health systems experiencing shocks. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine how the resilience of health systems has been measured across various health system shocks. Following PRISMA guidelines, with double screening at each stage, the review identified 3175 studies of which 68 studies were finally included for analysis. Almost half (46%) were focused on COVID-19, followed by the economic crises, disasters and previous pandemics. Over 80% of studies included quantitative metrics. The most common WHO health system functions studied were resources and service delivery. In relation to the shock cycle, most studies reported metrics related to the management stage (79%) with the fewest addressing recovery and learning (22%). Common metrics related to staff headcount, staff wellbeing, bed number and type, impact on utilisation and quality, public and private health spending, access and coverage, and information systems. Limited progress has been made with developing standardised qualitative metrics particularly around governance. Quantitative metrics need to be analysed in relation to change and the impact of the shock. The review notes problems with measuring preparedness and the fact that few studies have really assessed the legacy or enduring impact of shocks.

Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic to Strengthen TB Infection Control: A Rapid Review

In light of competing health priorities of COVID-19 and TB, we propose recommendations to strengthen health system preparedness for optimal TB control across low- and middle-income countries during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction:

Over the past 5 years, substantial global investment has resulted in reduced TB incidence rates by 9% and mortality rates by 14%. However, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has hindered access and availability of TB services to maintain robust TB control. The objective of this rapid review was to describe the challenges to be addressed and recommendations to strengthen health system preparedness for optimal TB control across low- and middle-income countries during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods:

Five databases were used to systematically search for relevant articles published in 2020. The 5-step framework proposed by Arskey and O'Malley and adapted by Levac et al. guided the review process. Thematic analysis with grounded theory principles was used to summarize themes from selected articles and integrate analyses with barriers reported from authors' previous TB research.

Results:

Of the 218 peer-reviewed articles, 20 articles met the inclusion criteria. Four emerging themes described challenges: (1) unprepared health system leadership and infrastructure, (2) coexisting health priorities, (3) insufficient health care workforce support for continued training and appropriate workplace environments, and (4) weak connections to primary health centers hindering community engagement. Four recommendations were highlighted: (1) ensuring leadership and governance for sustainable national health budgets, (2) building networks of community stakeholders, (3) supporting health care workforce training and safe workplace environments, and (4) using digital health interventions for TB care.

Conclusions:

National health systems must promote patient-centered TB care, implement ethical community interventions, support operational research, and integrate appropriate eHealth applications. TB program managers and primary care practitioners can serve as instrumental leaders and patient advocates to deliver high-quality and sustainable TB care that leads to achieving the targets of the End TB Strategy.