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 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and tuberculosis (TB) impose a substantial economic burden globally. This systematic review summarised the evidence on the costs of COPD, including post-TB diseases in low- and middle-income countries.Methods A systematic review was conducted and studies published between 1 January 2013 and 28 March 2022 (the date of the search) were identified using various electronic databases without language restrictions. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened in duplicate and data were extracted and verified by reviewers. Eligible studies were categorised as cost analysis and/or economic burden studies, and costs were converted to 2021 United State dollar. Meta-analysis was conducted on the costs of hospitalisations, medication and outpatient visits.Results 128 cost studies and 65 economic burden studies were included in this review. The data collected are presented in the Cost Database of COPD and Post-TB (CD-CPTB). The majority of studies were from Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America, with a few from other middle-income countries. There were extremely limited data on the costs of post-TB sequelae and only a few studies were from Africa (n=6) and low-income (n=5) countries. The direct medical costs of COPD ranged from $26 per hospitalisation in India to $2694 per year per patient with severe disease in Mexico, while the costs of acute exacerbation of COPD ranged from $137 to $4207 per exacerbation with both the minimum and maximum costs occurring in Turkey. The costs were lower in lower middle-income countries compared with upper middle-income countries. Finally, considerable economic burden was attributable to smoking and air pollution.Conclusion The review and the CD-CPTB database give a thorough snapshot of the current evidence of the costs and economic burden of COPD and post-TB diseases. Future research is needed to investigate the economic impact after TB treatment and should be prioritised in Africa and low-income countries where there has been a lack of data collection.Protocol registration number CRD42022326609.