Search

Child mortality measurement is essential to the impact evaluation of maternal and child healthcare systems interventions. In the absence of vital statistics systems, however, assessment methodologies for locally relevant interventions are severely challenged. Methods for assessing the under-5 mortality rate for cross-country comparisons, often used in determining progress towards development targets, pose challenges to implementers and researchers trying to assess the population impact of targeted interventions at more local levels. Here, we discuss the programmatic approach we have taken to mortality measurement in the context of delivering healthcare via a public–private partnership in rural Nepal. Both government officials and the delivery organisation, Possible, felt it was important to understand child mortality at a fine-grain spatial and temporal level. We discuss both the short-term and the long-term approach. In the short term, the team chose to use the under-2 mortality rate as a metric for mortality measurement for the following reasons: (1) as overall childhood mortality declines, like it has in rural Nepal, deaths concentrate among children under the age of 2; (2) 2-year cohorts are shorter and thus may show an impact more readily in the short term of intervention trials; and (3) 2-year cohorts are smaller, making prospective census cohorts more feasible in small populations. In the long term, Possible developed a digital continuous surveillance system to capture deaths as they occur, at which point under-5 mortality assessment would be desirable, largely owing to its role as a global standard.

Background: Global health academic partnerships are centered around a core tension: they often mirror or reproduce the very cross-national inequities they seek to alleviate. On the one hand, they risk worsening power dynamics that perpetuate health disparities; on the other, they form an essential response to the need for healthcare resources to reach marginalized populations across the globe. Objectives: This study characterizes the broader landscape of global health academic partnerships, including challenges to developing ethical, equitable, and sustainable models. It then lays out guiding principles of the specific partnership approach, and considers how lessons learned might be applied in other resource-limited settings. Methods: The experience of a partnership between the Ministry of Health in Nepal, the non-profit healthcare provider Possible, and the Health Equity Action and Leadership Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine was reviewed. The quality and effectiveness of the partnership was assessed using the Tropical Health and Education Trust Principles of Partnership framework. Results: Various strategies can be taken by partnerships to better align the perspectives of patients and public sector providers with those of expatriate physicians. Actions can also be taken to bring greater equity to the wealth and power gaps inherent within global health academic partnerships. Conclusions: This study provides recommendations gleaned from the analysis, with an aim towards both future refinement of the partnership and broader applications of its lessons and principles. It specifically highlights the importance of targeted engagements with academic medical centers and the need for efficient organizational work-flow practices. It considers how to both prioritize national and host institution goals, and meet the career development needs of global health clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decade the Ministry of Health of Nepal and the nonprofit Possible have partnered to deliver primary and secondary health care via a public-private partnership. We applied an accountable care framework that we previously developed to describe the delivery of their integrated reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health services in the Achham district in rural Nepal. In a prospective pre-post study, examining pregnancies at baseline and 541 pregnancies in follow-up over the course of eighteen months, we found an improvement in population-level indicators linked to reducing maternal and infant mortality: receipt of four antenatal care visits (83 percent to 90 percent), institutional birth rate (81 percent to 93 percent), and the prevalence of postpartum contraception (19 percent to 47 percent). The intervention cost $3.40 per capita (at the population level) and $185 total per pregnant woman who received services. This study provides new analysis and evidence on the implementation of innovative care and financing models in resource-limited settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]