Search

Social justice requires that communities demand social accountability. We conducted this study to inform ongoing efforts to facilitate social accountability through community health committees in Nigeria. We theorised that committees may see themselves in two ways - as outwardly-facing ('social accountability') and/or as inwardly-facing ('self-reliance'). We analysed the minutes of their meetings, alongside interviews and group discussions with committee members, community members, health workers, and health managers in four states across Nigeria. The committees' raison d'être reflects a bias for self-reliance in three ways. First, seen as a platform for the community to co-finance health services, members tend to be the local elite who can make financial contributions. Second, in a one-sided relationship, they function more to achieve the goals of governments (e.g. to improve the uptake of services), than of the community (e.g. rights-based demands for government support). Third, their activities in the community reflect greater concern to ensure that their community makes the most of what the government has already provided (e.g. helping to drive the uptake of existing services) than asking for more. Optimising the committees for social accountability may require support by actors who do not have conflicts of interests in ensuring that they have the necessary information and strategies to demand social accountability., (© 2022 The Authors. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Competing Interests: Seye Abimbola is a Section Editor for PLOS Global Public Health.

Objective: To understand how, and under what circumstances community participation in water and sanitation interventions impacts the availability of safe water and sanitation, a change in health status or behaviour and the longevity of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) resources and services., Design: Realist review., Data Sources: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were used to identify papers from low-income and middle-income countries from 2010 to 2020., Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies: Criteria were developed for papers to be included. The contribution of each paper was assessed based on its relevance and rigour (eg, can it contribute to context, mechanism or outcome, and is the method used to generate that information credible)., Analysis: Inductive and deductive coding was used to generate context-mechanism-outcome configurations., Results: 73 studies conducted in 29 countries were included. We identified five mechanisms that explained the availability, change and longevity outcomes: (1) accountability (policies and procedures to hold communities responsible for their actions and outcomes of an intervention), (2) diffusion (spread of an idea or behaviour by innovators over time through communication among members of a community), (3) market (the interplay between demand and supply of a WASH service or resource), (4) ownership (a sense of possession and control of the WASH service or resource) and (5) shame (a feeling of disgust in one's behaviour or actions). Contextual elements identified included community leadership and communication, technical skills and knowledge, resource access and dependency, committee activity such as the rules and management plans, location and the level of community participation., Conclusions: The findings highlight five key mechanisms impacted by 19 contextual factors that explain the outcomes of community water and sanitation interventions. Policymakers, programme implementers and institutions should consider community dynamics, location, resources, committee activity and practices and nature of community participation, before introducing community water and sanitation interventions., 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.)

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are leading causes of death globally and in Nigeria they account for 29% of total deaths. Nigeria's health system is decentralized. Fragmentation in governance in federalised countries with decentralised health systems is a well-recognised challenge to coherent national health policymaking. The policy response to the rising NCD burden therefore requires strategic intent by national and sub-national governments. This study aimed to understand the implementation of NCD policies in Nigeria, the role of decentralisation of those policies, and to consider the implications for achieving national NCD targets. We conducted a policy analysis combined with key informant interviews to determine to what extent NCD policies and strategies align with Nigeria's decentralised health system; and the structure and process within which implementation occurs across the various tiers of government. Four inter-related findings emerged: NCD national policies are 'top down' in focus and lack attention to decentralisation to subnational and frontline care delivery levels of the health system; there are defective coordination mechanisms for NCD programmes which are underpinned by weak regional organisational structures; financing for NCDs are administratively burdensome and fragmented; and frontline NCD service delivery for NCDs are not effectively being integrated with other essential PHC services. Despite considerable progress being made with development of national NCD policies, greater attention on their implementation at subnational levels is needed to achieve more effective service delivery and progress against national NCD targets. We recommend strengthening subnational coordination mechanisms, greater accountability frameworks, increased and more efficient funding, and greater attention to integrated PHC service delivery models. The use of an effective bottom-up approach, with consideration for decentralization, should also be engaged at all stages of policy formulation., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest., (Copyright: © 2021 Ajisegiri et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Despite the proliferation of learning collaborations such as innovation platforms, the factors contributing to their success or failure are rarely documented. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality learning collaboratives taxonomy provides a framework for understanding how such collaborations work in different settings according to four primary elements: innovation, communication, time, and social systems. This study applied the taxonomy to assess an innovation platform and the utility of applying the taxonomy., Methods: The study focus was a five-year national research collaboration operating as an innovation platform to strengthen primary health care quality improvement efforts for Indigenous Australians. The study team analyzed project records, reports and publications, and interviews that were conducted with 35 stakeholders. Data were mapped retrospectively against the taxonomy domains and thematically analyzed., Results: The taxonomy proved useful in understanding how and why the innovation platform generated innovations. It revealed that time was particularly important, both to see innovations through and to establish a social system that enabled interconnectivity between members. However, the taxonomy did not provide useful guidance on identifying the types of innovations from the collaboration or the importance of a culture of continuous adaptation and learning. The study also found that the primary and secondary elements of the taxonomy were not discrete, which meant that it was difficult to align themes with only one element., Conclusion: To improve the utility of the taxonomy, several elaborations are proposed, including reconfiguring it to a more dynamic form that recognizes the interconnections and links between the elements., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) now account for about 71% and 32% of all the deaths globally and in Ethiopia. Primary health care (PHC) is a vital instrument to address the ever-increasing burden of NCDs and is the best strategy for delivering integrated and equitable NCD care. We explored the capacity and readiness of Ethiopia's PHC system to deliver integrated, people-centred NCD services., Methods: A qualitative study was conducted in two regions and Federal Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. We carried out twenty-two key informant interviews with national and regional policymakers, officials from a partner organisation, woreda/district health office managers and coordinators, and PHC workers. Data were coded and thematically analysed using the World Health Organization (WHO) Operational Framework for PHC., Results: Although the rising NCD burden is well recognised in Ethiopia, and the country has NCD-specific strategies and some interventions in place, we identified critical gaps in several levers of the WHO Operational Framework. Many compared the under-investment in NCDs contrasted with Ethiopia's successful PHC models established for maternal and child health and communicable disease programs. Insufficient political commitment and leadership required to integrate NCD services at the PHC level and weaknesses in governance structures, inter-sectoral coordination, and funding for NCDs were identified as significant barriers to strengthening PHC capacity to address NCDs. Among the operational-focussed levers, fragmented information management systems and inadequate equipment and medicines were identified as critical bottlenecks. The PHC workforce was also considered insufficiently skilled and supported to provide NCD services in PHC facilities., Conclusion: Strengthening NCD prevention and control through PHC in Ethiopia requires greater political commitment and investment at all health system levels. Prior success strategies with other PHC programs could be adapted and applied to NCD policies and practice, giving due consideration for the unique nature of the NCD program., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2021 Tesema et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

This Viewpoint calls attention to the pervasive wrongs related to knowledge production, use, and circulation in global health, many of which are taken for granted. We argue that common practices in academic global health (eg, authorship practices, research partnerships, academic writing, editorial practices, sensemaking practices, and the choice of audience or research framing, questions, and methods) are peppered with epistemic wrongs that lead to or exacerbate epistemic injustice. We describe two forms of epistemic wrongs, credibility deficit and interpretive marginalisation, which stem from structural exclusion of marginalised producers and recipients of knowledge. We then illustrate these forms of epistemic wrongs using examples of common practices in academic global health, and show how these wrongs are linked to the pose (or positionality) and the gaze (or audience) of producers of knowledge. The epistemic injustice framework shown in this Viewpoint can help to surface, detect, communicate, make sense of, avoid, and potentially undo unfair knowledge practices in global health that are inflicted upon people in their capacity as knowers, and as producers and recipients of knowledge, owing to structural prejudices in the processes involved in knowledge production, use, and circulation in global health., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Though multidisciplinary research networks support the practice and effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes, their characteristics and development are poorly understood. In this study, we examine publication outputs from a research network in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) to assess to what extent the research network changed over time., Setting: Australian CQI research network in Indigenous PHC from 2002 to 2019., Participants: Authors from peer-reviewed journal articles and books published by the network., Design: Coauthor networks across four phases of the network (2002-2004; 2005-2009; 2010-2014; 2015-2019) were constructed based on author affiliations and examined using social network analysis methods. Descriptive characteristics included organisation types, Indigenous representation, gender, student authorship and thematic research trends., Results: We identified 128 publications written by 308 individual authors from 79 different organisations. Publications increased in number and diversity over each funding phase. During the final phase, publication outputs accelerated for organisations, students, project officers, Indigenous and female authors. Over time there was also a shift in research themes to encompass new clinical areas and social, environmental or behavioural determinants of health. Average degree (8.1), clustering (0.81) and diameter (3) indicated a well-connected network, with a core-periphery structure in each phase (p≤0.03) rather than a single central organisation (degree centralisation=0.55-0.65). Academic organisations dominated the core structure in all funding phases., Conclusion: Collaboration in publications increased with network consolidation and expansion. Increased productivity was associated with increased authorship diversity and a decentralised network, suggesting these may be important factors in enhancing research impact and advancing the knowledge and practice of CQI in PHC. Publication diversity and growth occurred mainly in the fourth phase, suggesting long-term relationship building among diverse partners is required to facilitate participatory research in CQI. Despite improvements, further work is needed to address inequities in female authorship and Indigenous authorship., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that this research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 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.)

Seye Abimbola and co-authors argue for a transformation in global health research and practice in the post-COVID-19 world., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: MP serves on the editorial board of PLOS Medicine. None of the other authors have competing interests to disclose.

Introduction: Indigenous communities worldwide are leading calls for all research involving Indigenous people to be underpinned by values and principles articulated by them. Many researchers are explicitly adopting these principles to guide what, where, how and when research is undertaken with Indigenous people. With critical reflection to support the implementation of such principles largely absent from published literature, this paper explores both the implementation of, and the outcomes from a set of guiding principles used in a large-scale Australian research collaboration to improve Indigenous health., Methods: In this inductive qualitative study, we adopted a principles-focused evaluation approach. Based on interviews with 35 actors in the collaboration and a review of project documents, we generated themes that were then iteratively discussed, refined and categorised into (1) 'strategies'-activities by which implementation of our guiding principles were recognised; (2) 'outcomes'-results seen from implementing the principles and (3) 'conditions'-aspects of the context that facilitated and constrained implementation of the principles., Results: Respondents found it difficult to articulate how the guiding principles were actually implemented, and frequently referred to them as part of the fabric of the collaboration. They viewed the set of principles as mutually reinforcing, and as providing a rudder for navigating complexity and conflict. Implementation of the principles occurred through five strategies-honouring the principles; being dynamic and adaptable; sharing and dispersing leadership; collaborating purposefully and adopting a culture of mutual learning. Outcomes included increased Indigenous leadership and participation; the ability to attract principled and values-driven researchers and stakeholders, and the development of trusting and respectful relationships. The conditions that facilitated the implementation of the principles were collaborating over time; an increasing number of Indigenous researchers and taking an 'innovation platform' approach., Conclusion: Our findings show that principles guiding collaborations are valuable in providing a focus, direction and a way of working together when they are collaboratively developed, hold genuine meaning for all members and are implemented within a culture of continuous critical reflection, learning and adaptation, with ongoing reinterpretation of the principles over time., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that this research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. SA is the Editor in Chief of BMJ Global Health, but was not involved in the evaluation or peer-review process of this article., (© 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.)

Background: Evaluation of health technology programmes should be theoretically informed, interdisciplinary, and generate in-depth explanations. The NASSS (non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, sustainability) framework was developed to study unfolding technology programmes in real time-and in particular to identify and manage their emergent uncertainties and interdependencies. In this paper, we offer a worked example of how NASSS can also inform ex post (i.e. retrospective) evaluation., Methods: We studied the TORPEDO (Treatment of Cardiovascular Risk in Primary Care using Electronic Decision Support) research programme, a multi-faceted computerised quality improvement intervention for cardiovascular disease prevention in Australian general practice. The technology (HealthTracker) had shown promise in a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT), but its uptake and sustainability in a real-world implementation phase was patchy. To explain this variation, we used NASSS to undertake secondary analysis of the multi-modal TORPEDO dataset (results and process evaluation of the RCT, survey responses, in-depth professional interviews, videotaped consultations) as well as a sample of new, in-depth narrative interviews with TORPEDO researchers., Results: Ex post analysis revealed multiple areas of complexity whose influence and interdependencies helped explain the wide variation in uptake and sustained use of the HealthTracker technology: the nature of cardiovascular risk in different populations, the material properties and functionality of the technology, how value (financial and non-financial) was distributed across stakeholders in the system, clinicians' experiences and concerns, organisational preconditions and challenges, extra-organisational influences (e.g. policy incentives), and how interactions between all these influences unfolded over time., Conclusion: The NASSS framework can be applied retrospectively to generate a rich, contextualised narrative of technology-supported change efforts and the numerous interacting influences that help explain its successes, failures, and unexpected events. A NASSS-informed ex post analysis can supplement earlier, contemporaneous evaluations to uncover factors that were not apparent or predictable at the time but dynamic and emergent.

Background: The Indian National Program for Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, Cancer and Stroke (NPCDCS) was introduced to provide non-communicable disease (NCD) care through primary healthcare teams including Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs). Since ASHAs are being deployed to provide NCD care on top of their regular work for the first time, there is a need to understand the current capacity and challenges faced by them., Methods: A desktop review of NPCDCS and ASHA policy documents was conducted. This was followed by group discussions with ASHAs, in-depth interviews with their supervisors and medical officers and group discussions with community members in Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India. The multi-stakeholder data were analysed for themes related to needs, capacity, and challenges of ASHAs in providing NCD services., Results: This study identified three key themes-first, ASHAs are unrecognised as part of the formal NPCDCS service delivery team. Second, they are overburdened, since they deliver several NPCDCS activities without receiving training or remuneration. Third, they aspire to be formally recognised as employees of the health system. However, ASHAs are enthusiastic about the services they provide and remain an essential link between the health system and the community., Conclusion: ASHAs play a key role in providing comprehensive and culturally appropriate care to communities; however, they are unrecognised and overburdened and aspire to be part of the health system. ASHAs have the potential to deliver a broad range of services, if supported by the health system appropriately., Trial Registration: The study was registered with "Clinical Trials Registry - India" (identifier CTRI/2018/03/012425 ).

One constant refrain in evaluations and reviews of decentralization is that the results are mixed. But given that decentralization is a complex intervention or phenomenon, what is more important is to generate evidence to inform implementation strategies. We therefore synthesized evidence from the literature to understand why, how and under what circumstances decentralization influences health system equity, efficiency and resilience. In doing this, we adopted the realist approach to evidence synthesis and included quantitative and qualitative studies in high-, low- and middle-income countries that assessed the the impact of decentralization on health systems. We searched the Medline and Embase databases via Ovid, and the Cochrane library of systematic reviews and included 51 studies with data from 25 countries. We identified three mechanisms through which decentralization impacts on health system equity, efficiency and resilience: 'Voting with feet' (reflecting how decentralization either exacerbates or assuages the existing patterns of inequities in the distribution of people, resources and outcomes in a jurisdiction); 'Close to ground' (reflecting how bringing governance closer to the people allows for use of local initiative, information, feedback, input and control); and 'Watching the watchers' (reflecting mutual accountability and support relations between multiple centres of governance which are multiplied by decentralization, involving governments at different levels and also community health committees and health boards). We also identified institutional, socio-economic and geographic contextual factors that influence each of these mechanisms. By moving beyond findings that the effects of decentralization on health systems and outcomes are mixed, this review presents mechanisms and contextual factors to which policymakers and implementers need to pay attention in their efforts to maximize the positive and minimize the negative impact of decentralized governance., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.)

By what measure should a policy maker choose between two mediums that deliver the same or similar message or service? Between, say, video consultation or a remote patient monitoring application (i.e. patient-facing digital health innovations) and in-person consultation? To answer this question, we sought to identify measures which are used in randomised controlled trials. But first we used two theories to frame the effects of patient-facing digital health innovations on - 1) transaction costs (i.e. the effort, time and costs required to complete a clinical interaction); and 2) process outcomes and clinical outcomes along the care cascade or information value chain, such that the 'value of information' (VoI) is different at each point in the care cascade or value chain. From the trials, we identified three categories of measures: outcome (process or clinical), satisfaction, and cost. We found that although patient-facing digital health innovations tend to confer much of their value by altering process outcomes, satisfaction, and transaction costs, these measures are inconsistently assessed. Efforts to determine the relative value of and choose between mediums of service delivery should adopt a metric (i.e. mathematical combination of measures) that capture all dimensions of value. We argue that 'value of information' (VoI) is such a metric - it is calculated as the difference between the 'expected utility' (EU) of alternative options. But for patient-facing digital health innovations, 'expected utility' (EU) should incorporate the probability of achieving not only a clinical outcome, but also process outcomes (depending on the innovation under consideration); and the measures of utility should include satisfaction and transaction costs; and also changes in population access to services, and health system capacity to deliver more services, which may result from reduction in transaction costs.

Despite growing support for integration of frontline services, a lack of information about the pre-conditions necessary to integrate such services hampers the ability of policy makers and implementers to assess how feasible or worthwhile integration may be, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We adopted a modified systematic review with aspects of realist review, including quantitative and qualitative studies that incorporated assessment of health system preparedness for and capacity to implement integrated services. We searched Medline via Ovid, Web of Science and the Cochrane library using terms adapted from Dudley and Garner's systematic review on integration in LMICs. From an initial list of 10 550 articles, 206 were selected for full-text review by two reviewers who independently reviewed articles and inductively extracted and synthesized themes related to health system preparedness. We identified five 'context' related categories and four health system 'capability' themes. The contextual enabling and constraining factors for frontline service integration were: (1) the organizational framework of frontline services, (2) health care worker preparedness, (3) community and client preparedness, (4) upstream logistics and (5) policy and governance issues. The intersecting health system capabilities identified were the need for: (1) sufficiently functional frontline health services, (2) sufficiently trained and motivated health care workers, (3) availability of technical tools and equipment suitable to facilitate integrated frontline services and (4) appropriately devolved authority and decision-making processes to enable frontline managers and staff to adapt integration to local circumstances. Moving beyond claims that integration is defined differently by different programs and thus unsuitable for comparison, this review demonstrates that synthesis is possible. It presents a common set of contextual factors and health system capabilities necessary for successful service integration which may be considered indicators of preparedness and could form the basis for an 'integration preparedness tool'., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.)

It is important that researchers who study health system governance have a set of collective understandings of the meanings of governance, which can then inform the methods used in research. We present an institutional framing and definition of health system governance; that is, governance refers to making, changing, monitoring and enforcing the rules that govern the demand and supply of health services. This pervasive, relational view of governance is to be preferred to approaches that focus primarily on structures of governments and health care organizations, because health system governance involves communities and service users, and because governments in many low- and middle-income countries tend to under-govern. Therefore, the study of health system governance requires institutional analysis; an approach that focuses not only on structures, but also on the rules (both formal and informal) governing demand and supply relations. Using this 'structure-relations' lens, and based on our field experience, we discuss how this focus could be applied to the three approaches to framing and studying health system governance that we identified in the literature. In order of decreasing focus on structures ('hardware') and increasing focus on relations ('software'), they are: (1) the government-centred approach, which focuses on the role of governments, above or to the exclusion of non-government health system actors; (2) the building-block approach, which focuses on the internal workings of health care organizations, and treats governance as one of the several building blocks of organizations; and (3) the institutional approach, which focuses on how the rules governing social and economic interactions are made, changed, monitored and enforced. Notably, either or both qualitative and quantitative methods may be used by researchers in efforts to incorporate the analysis of how rules determine relations among health system actors into these three approaches to health system governance., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The posting and transfer of health workers and managers receives little policy and research attention in global health. In Nigeria, there is no national policy on posting and transfer in the health sector. We sought to examine how the posting and transfer of frontline primary health care (PHC) workers is conducted in four states (Lagos, Benue, Nasarawa and Kaduna) across Nigeria, where public sector PHC facilities are usually the only form of formal health care service providers available in many communities. We conducted in-depth interviews with PHC workers and managers, and group discussions with community health committee members. The results revealed three mechanisms by which PHC managers conduct posting and transfer: (1) periodically moving PHC workers around as a routine exercise aimed at enhancing their professional experience and preventing them from being corrupted; (2) as a tool for improving health service delivery by assigning high-performing PHC workers to PHC facilities perceived to be in need, or posting PHC workers nearer their place of residence; and (3) as a response to requests for punishment or favour from PHC workers, political office holders, global health agencies and community health committees. Given that posting and transfer is conducted by discretion, with multiple influences and sometimes competing interests, we identified practices that may lead to unfair treatment and inequities in the distribution of PHC workers. The posting and transfer of PHC workers therefore requires policy measures to codify what is right about existing informal practices and to avert their negative potential. © 2016 The Authors The International Journal of Health Planning and Management Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (© 2016 The Authors The International Journal of Health Planning and Management Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

One of the consequences of ineffective governments is that they leave space for unlicensed and unregulated informal providers without formal training to deliver a large proportion of health services. Without institutions that facilitate appropriate health care transactions, patients tend to navigate health care markets from one inappropriate provider to another, receiving sub-optimal care, before they find appropriate providers; all the while incurring personal transaction costs. But the top-down interventions to address this barrier to accessing care are hampered by weak governments, as informal providers are entrenched in communities. To explore the role that communities could play in limiting informal providers, we applied the transaction costs theory of the firm which predicts that economic agents tend to organise production within firms when the costs of coordinating exchange through the market are greater than within a firm. In a realist analysis of qualitative data from Nigeria, we found that community health committees sometimes seek to limit informal providers in a manner that is consistent with the transaction costs theory of the firm. The committees deal not through legal sanction but by subtle influence and persuasion in a slow and faltering process of institutional change, leveraging the authority and resources available within their community, and from governments and NGOs. First, they provide information to reduce the market share controlled by informal providers, and then regulation to keep informal providers at bay while making the formal provider more competitive. When these efforts are ineffective or insufficient, committees are faced with a "make-or-buy" decision. The "make" decision involves coordination to co-produce formal health services and facilitate referrals from informal to formal providers. What sometimes results is a quasi-firm-informal and formal providers are networked in a single but loose production unit. These findings suggest that efforts to limit informal providers should seek to, among other things, augment existing community responses.

Background: Decentralised governance of health care has been widely adopted globally over the past three decades. But despite being implemented as a management strategy across many health systems, its impact on health equity is yet unclear., Objective: To conduct a systematic literature review of the implications of decentralised governance of health care on equity in health, health care and health financing., Methods: A systematic search of CINAHL, EconLit, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane database of systematic reviews was conducted. Articles that met the inclusion criteria examined entire health systems and the relationship between implementing decentralised governance and health-related equity. The quality of reporting of the included studies was assessed using a 10-point quality rating tool., Results: Out of 808 articles identified, 9 met the inclusion criteria. The included studies were mostly explorative and used a range of quantitative techniques to analyse the relationship between variables of interest. The review found that depending on context, decentralisation could either lead to equity gains or exacerbate inequities. The impact of decentralisation on inequities in health and health care depends on pre-existing socio-economic disparities and financial barriers to access. While decentralisation can lead to inequities in health financing between sub-national jurisdictions, this is minimised with substantial central government transfers and cross subsidisation., Conclusion: The implications of decentralised governance of health systems on health-related equity are varied and depend on pre-existing socio-economic and organisational context, the form of decentralisation implemented and the complementary mechanisms implemented alongside decentralisation., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Since the mid-1980s, the national health policy in Nigeria has sought to inspire community engagement in primary health care by bringing communities into partnership with service providers through community health committees. Using a realist approach to understand how and under what circumstances the committees function, we explored 581 meeting minutes from 129 committees across four states in Nigeria (Lagos, Benue, Nasarawa and Kaduna). We found that community health committees provide opportunities for improving the demand and supply of health care in their community. Committees demonstrate five modes of functioning: through meetings (as 'village square'), reaching out within their community (as 'community connectors'), lobbying governments for support (as 'government botherers'), inducing and augmenting government support (as 'back-up government') and taking control of health care in their community (as 'general overseers'). In performing these functions, community health committees operate within and through the existing social, cultural and religious structures of their community, thereby providing an opportunity for the health facility with which they are linked to be responsive to the needs and values of the community. But due to power asymmetries, committees have limited capacity to influence health facilities for improved performance, and governments for improved health service provision. This is perhaps because national guidelines are not clear on their accountability functions; they are not aware of the minimum standards of services to expect; and they have a limited sense of legitimacy in their relations with sub-national governments because they are established as the consequence of a national policy. Committees therefore tend to promote collective action for self-support more than collective action for demanding accountability. To function optimally, community health committees require national government or non-government organization mentoring and support; they need to be enshrined in law to bolster their sense of legitimacy; and they also require financial support to subsidise their operation costs especially in geographically large communities., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.)

Background: Studies on costs incurred by patients for tuberculosis (TB) care are limited as these costs are reported as averages, and the economic impact of the costs is estimated based on average patient/household incomes. Average expenditures do not represent the poor because they spend less on treatment compared to other economic groups. Thus, the extent to which TB expenditures risk sending households into, or further into, poverty and its determinants, is unknown. We assessed the incidence and determinants of household catastrophic payments for TB care in rural Nigeria., Methods: Data used were obtained from a survey of 452 pulmonary TB patients sampled from three rural health facilities in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. Using household direct costs and income data, we analyzed the incidence of household catastrophic payments using, as thresholds, the traditional >10% of household income and the ≥40% of non-food income, as recommended by the World Health Organization. We used logistic regression analysis to identify the determinants of catastrophic payments., Results: Average direct household costs for TB were US$157 or 14% of average annual incomes. The incidence catastrophic payment was 44%; with 69% and 15% of the poorest and richest household income-quartiles experiencing catastrophic activity, respectively. Independent determinants of catastrophic payments were: age >40 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0, 7.8), male gender (aOR 3.0; CI 1.8, 5.2), urban residence (aOR 3.8; CI 1.9, 7.7), formal education (aOR 4.7; CI 2.5, 8.9), care at a private facility (aOR 2.9; 1.5, 5.9), poor household (aOR 6.7; CI 3.7, 12), household where the patient is the primary earner (aOR 3.8; CI 2.2, 6.6]), and HIV co-infection (aOR 3.1; CI 1.7, 5.6)., Conclusions: Current cost-lowering strategies are not enough to prevent households from incurring catastrophic out-of-pocket payments for TB care. Financial and social protection interventions are needed for identified at-risk groups, and community-level interventions may reduce inefficiencies in the care-seeking pathway. These observations should inform post-2015 TB strategies and influence policy-making on health services that are meant to be free of charge.