Search

Background Health challenges like coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are becoming increasingly complex, transnational, and unpredictable. Studying health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to enhance our understanding of health system resilience and establish a clearer link between theoretical concepts and practical ideas on how to build resilience. Methods This narrative literature review aims to address four questions using a health system resilience framework: (i) What do we understand about the dimensions of resilience? (ii) What aspects of the resilience dimensions remain uncertain? (iii) What aspects of the resilience dimensions are missing from the COVID-19 discussions? and (iv) What has COVID-19 taught us about resilience that is missing from the framework? A scientific literature database search was conducted in December 2020 and in April 2022 to identify publications that discussed health system resilience in relation to COVID-19, excluding articles on psychological and other types of resilience. A total of 63 publications were included. Results There is good understanding around information sharing, flexibility and good leadership, learning, maintaining essential services, and the need for legitimate, interdependent systems. Decision-making, localized trust, influences on interdependence, and transformation remain uncertain. Vertical interdependence, monitoring risks beyond the health system, and consequences of changes on the system were not discussed. Teamwork, actor legitimacy, values, inclusivity, trans-sectoral resilience, and the role of the private sector are identified as lessons from COVID-19 that should be further explored for health system resilience. Conclusion Knowledge of health system resilience has continued to cohere following the pandemic. The eventual consequences of system changes and the resilience of subsystems are underexplored. Through governance, the concept of health system resilience can be linked to wider issues raised by the pandemic, like inclusivity. Our findings show the utility of resilience theory for strengthening health systems for crises and the benefit of continuing to refine existing resilience theory.

Background In 2014, Terre des Hommes (Tdh) together with the Ministry of Health (MoH) launched the Integrated electronic Diagnosis Approach (IeDA) intervention in two regions of Burkina Faso consisting of supplying every health centre with a digital algorithm. A realistic evaluation was conducted to understand the implementation process, the mechanisms by which the IeDA intervention lead to change.Methods Data collection took place between January 2016 and October 2017. Direct observation in health centres were conducted. In-depth interviews were conducted with 154 individuals including 92 healthcare workers (HCW) from health centres, 16 officers from district health authorities, 6 members of health centre management committees. In addition, 5 focus groups were organised with carers. The initial coding was based on a preliminary list of codes inspired by the middle-range theory (MRT).Results Our results showed that the adoption of the electronic protocol depended on a multiplicity of management practices including role distribution, team work, problem solving approach, task monitoring, training, supervision, support and recognition. Such changes lead to reorganising the health team and redistributing roles before and during consultation, and positive atmosphere that included recognition of each team member, organisational commitment and sense of belonging. Conditions for such management changes to be effective included open dialog at all levels of the system, a minimum of resources to cover the support services and supervision and regular discussions focusing on solving problems faced by health centre teams.Conclusion This project reinforces the point that in a successful diffusion of IeDA, it is necessary to combine the introduction of technology with support and management mechanisms. It also important to highlight that managers’ attitude plays a great place in the success of the intervention: open dialog and respect are crucial dimensions. This is aligned with the findings from other studies.

The term resilience has dominated the discourse among health systems researchers since 2014 and the onset of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. There is wide consensus that the global community has to help build more resilient health systems. But do we really know what resilience means, and do we all have the same vision of resilience? The present paper presents a new conceptual framework on governance of resilience based on systems thinking and complexity theories. In this paper, we see resilience of a health system as its capacity to absorb, adapt and transform when exposed to a shock such as a pandemic, natural disaster or armed conflict and still retain the same control over its structure and functions.

Background Over the past few decades diabetes has emerged as an important non-communicable disease in SubSaharan Africa (SSA). Sight loss from Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) can be prevented with screening and early treatment. The objective of this paper is to outline the required actions and considerations in the planning and development of DR screening services. Methods A multiple-case study approach was used to analyse five DR screening services in Botswana, Ghana, Tanzania and Zambia. Cases included: two regional screening programmes, two hospital-based screening services and one nationwide screening service. Data was collected using qualitative methodologies including: document analysis, indepth interviews and observation. The World Health Organization (WHO) Health Systems Framework was adopted as the conceptual framework for analysis. Results Planning for a sustainable and integrated DR screening programme demanded a health systems approach. Collaboration with representatives from a variety of ministerial departments and professional bodies was required. Evolution of DR screening services may occur in a variety of ways including: increasing geographical coverage, integration into the general healthcare system, and stepwise progression from a passive, opportunistic service to one that systematically and proactively seeks to prevent DR. Lessons learned from the implementation of cervical cancer prevention programmes in resource-poor settings may assist the development of DR programmes in similar settings. Conclusion To promote good planning of DR screening services and ensure limited resources are used effectively, there is a need to learn from screening programmes in other medical specialities and a need to share experiences between newly-developing DR programmes in resource-poor countries. The WHO Health Systems Framework presents an invaluable tool to ensure a systematic approach to planning DR screening services.

International health is still highly dominated by equilibrium approaches. The emergence of systems thinking in international health provides a great avenue to develop innovative health interventions adapted to changing contexts. The public health community, nevertheless, has the responsibility to translate concepts related to systems thinking and complexity into concrete research methods and interventions. One possibility is to consider the properties of systems such as resilience and adaptability as entry points to better understand how health systems react to shocks.

Achieving the Millennium Development Goals has proven to be a real challenge. Providing evidence on cost-effective interventions did not prove to be sufficient to secure the trust of national authorities, health care providers and patients. Introducing change in a health system requires a good understanding of the relationships between the actors of the system. Social network analysis can provide a new avenue to analyse the diffusion of innovations within a health system or a health organisation and analyse the structure and the properties of a health system. Evidence has been generated on the necessity of not only identifying the actors of a system but also qualifying the relationships between these actors.

Health systems research aims to understand the governance of health systems (i.e. how health systems function and perform and how their actors interact with each other). This can be achieved by applying innovative methodologies and concepts that are going to capture the complexity and dynamics of health systems when they are affected by shocks. The capacity of health systems to adapt to shocks (i.e. the resilience of health systems) is a new area of investigation. Social network analysis is a great avenue that can help measure the properties of systems and analyse the relationships between its actors and between the structure of a health system and the performance of a health system. A new conceptual framework is presented to define the governance of health systems using a resilience perspective.