Search

Objective: To synthesise evidence on the primary healthcare system's readiness for preventing and managing non-communicable diseases (NCDs)., Design: Systematic review., Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus were searched from 1 January 1984 to 30 July 2021, with hand-searching references and expert advice., Eligibility Criteria: Any English-language health research with evidence of readiness/preparedness of the health system at the primary healthcare level in the context of four major NCDs: diabetes mellitus, cancer, chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs)., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the bias. The full-text selected articles were then assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Health system readiness was descriptively and thematically synthesised in line with the health system dynamics framework., Results: Out of 7843 records, 23 papers were included in this review (15 quantitative, 3 qualitative and 5 mixed-method studies). The findings showed that existing literature predominantly examined health system readiness from the supply-side perspective as embedded in the WHO's health system framework. However, at the primary healthcare level, these components are insufficiently prepared for NCDs. Among NCDs, higher levels of readiness were reported for diabetes mellitus and hypertension in comparison to CRDs (asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), CVDs and cancer. There has been a dearth of research on the demand-side perspective, which is an essential component of a health system and must be addressed in the future research., Conclusion: The supply-side components at the primary healthcare level are inadequately ready to address the growing NCD burden. Improving supply-side factors, with a particular focus on CRDs, CVDs and cancer, and improving understanding of the demand-side components of the health system's readiness, may help to prevent and manage NCDs at the primary healthcare level., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is rapidly increasing in Bangladesh. Currently, it contributes to 67% of annual deaths, and accounts for approximately 64% of the disease burden. Since 70% of the Bangladeshi population residing in the rural area rely on the primary healthcare system, assessment of its capacity is crucial for guiding public health decisions to prevent and manage NCDs. This protocol is designed to recognise and assess the Bangladeshi health system's readiness for NCDs at the primary level., Methods and Analysis: The study will use a mixed-method design. Numerical data will be collected using households and health facilities surveys, while qualitative data will be collected by interviewing healthcare providers, policy planners, health administrators and community members. The WHO's Service Availability and Readiness Assessment (SARA) methodology and Package of Essential Non-communicable (PEN) Disease Interventions for Primary Healthcare reference manuals will be used to assess the readiness of the primary healthcare facilities for NCD services. Furthermore, Health System Dynamics Framework will be used to examine health system factors. Using the supportive items outlined in the WHO PEN package, and indicators proposed in WHO SARA methodology, a composite score will be created to analyse facility-level data. Two independent samples t-test, analysis of variance and χ 2 test methods will be used for bivariate analysis, and multiple regression analysis will be used for multivariable analysis. Complementarily, the thematic analysis approach will be used to analyse qualitative data., Ethics and Dissemination: The project has been approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project ID: 27112), and Bangladesh Medical Research Council (Ref: BMRC/NREC/2019-2022/270). The research findings will be shared through research articles, conference proceedings or in other scientific media. The reports or publications will not have any information that can be used to identify any of the study participants., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) including urinary incontinence, faecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse are common debilitating conditions among women in high-income countries. However, PFDs in women in low/middle-income countries (LMICs) have not been studied extensively. We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature to determine the prevalence of, and/or risk factors for, PFDs in women in LMIC., Methods and Analysis: We will search electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Maternity & Infant Care and Google Scholar for eligible studies. Inclusion criteria will be observational studies of healthy women, which have collected data using validated or non-validated tools, are published in English and were conducted in community women in LMICs, defined by the World Bank. A standardised data extraction form will be developed and piloted, based on the template of the Cochrane good practice data extraction form. All included studies will be assessed based on a risk-of-bias tool specifically developed for prevalence studies. Pooled prevalence estimates of PFDs will be generated using RevMan V.5.2.1 software. Forest plots will be generated to display the overall random-effects pooled estimates with CIs. A metaregression will be conducted to identify sources of between-study heterogeneity in the pooled prevalence estimates. We will quantify heterogeneity using the I 2 measure and its CI. We will use funnel plots to detect potential reporting biases and small-study effects. We will also conduct a sensitivity analysis to verify the robustness of the study conclusions, assessing the impact of methodological quality, study design, sample size and the effect of missing data., Ethics and Dissemination: Our review is entirely based on published data. Thus, an ethics committee approval or written informed consent will not be required for this study as primary data will not be collected. The results will be disseminated by publication of the manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal and/or will be presented at relevant conferences., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42016043881., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)