Developing more participatory and accountable institutions for health: identifying health system research priorities for the Sustainable Development Goal-era

Prehospital clinical practice guidelines for unintentional injuries: a scoping review and prioritisation process

BACKGROUND

Globally, millions of people die and many more develop disabilities resulting from injuries each year. Most people who die from injuries do so before they are transported to hospital. Thus, reliable, pragmatic, and evidence-based prehospital guidance for various injuries is essential. We systematically mapped and described prehospital clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for injuries in the global context, as well as prioritised injury topics for guidance development and adolopment.

METHODS

This study was sequentially conducted in three phases: a scoping review for CPGs (Phase I), identification and refinement of gaps in CPGs (Phase II), and ranking and prioritisation of gaps in CPGs (Phase III). For Phase I, we searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and Trip Database; guideline repositories and websites up to 23^rd May 2021. Two authors in duplicate independently screened titles and abstract, and full-text as well as extracted data of eligible CPGs. Guidelines had to meet 60% minimum methodological quality according to rigour of development domain in AGREE II. The second and third phases involved 17 participants from 9 African countries and 1 from Europe who participated in a virtual stakeholder engagement workshop held on 5 April 2022, and followed by an online ranking process.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight CPGs were included out of 3,427 guidance documents obtained and screened. 39/58 (67%) were developed de novo compared to 19 that were developed using alternative approaches. Twenty-five out of 58 guidelines (43%) were developed by bodies in countries within the WHO European Region, while only one guideline was targeted to the African context. Twenty-five (43%) CPGs targeted emergency medical service providers, while 13 (22%) targeted first aid providers (laypeople). Forty-three CPGs (74%) targeted people of all ages. The 58 guidance documents contained 32 injury topics. Injuries linked to road traffic accidents such as traumatic brain injuries and chest injuries were among the top prioritised topics for future guideline development by the workshop participants.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the availability, gaps and priority injury topics for future guideline development/adolopment, especially for the African context. Further research is needed to evaluate the recommendations in the 58 included CPGs for possible adaptation to the African context.

Social Accountability Reporting for Research (SAR4Research): checklist to strengthen reporting on studies on social accountability in the literature

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of evaluations of social accountability (SA) interventions have been published in the past decade, however, reporting gaps make it difficult to summarize findings. We developed the Social Accountability Reporting for Research (SAR4Research) checklist to support researchers to improve the documentation of SA processes, context, study designs, and outcomes in the peer reviewed literature and to enhance application of findings.

METHODS

We used a multi-step process, starting with an umbrella review of reviews on SA to identify reporting gaps. Next, we reviewed existing guidelines for reporting on behavioral interventions to determine whether one could be used in its current or adapted form. We received feedback from practitioners and researchers and tested the checklist through three worked examples using outcome papers from three SA projects.

RESULTS

Our umbrella review of SA studies identified reporting gaps in all areas, including gaps in reporting on the context, intervention components, and study methods. Because no existing guidelines called for details on context and the complex processes in SA interventions, we used CONSORT-SPI as the basis for the SAR4Research checklist, and adapted it using other existing checklists to fill gaps. Feedback from practitioners, researchers and the worked examples suggested the need to eliminate redundancies, add explanations for items, and clarify reporting for quantitative and qualitative study components.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of SA evaluations in the peer-reviewed literature will be more useful, facilitating learning and application of findings, when study designs, interventions and their context are described fully in one or a set of papers. This checklist will help authors report better in peer-reviewed journal articles. With sufficient information, readers will better understand whether the results can inform accountability strategies in their own contexts. As a field, we will be better able to identify emerging findings and gaps in our understanding of SA.

Strengthening social accountability in ways that build inclusion, institutionalization and scale: reflections on FHS experience

This editorial provides an introduction to the special issue on "Lessons about intervening in accountability ecosystems: implementation of community scorecards in Bangladesh and Uganda". We start by describing the rationale for this work in the two study countries. While our project, the Future Health Systems (FHS) project, had been working over the course of more than a decade to strengthen health services, particularly for low income households in rural areas, our teams increasingly recognized how difficult it would be to sustain service improvements without fundamental changes to local accountabilities. Accordingly, in the final phase of the project 2016-2018, we designed, implemented and assessed community scorecard initiatives, in both Bangladesh and Uganda, with the aim of informing the design of a scalable social accountability initiative that could fundamentally shift the dynamics of health system accountability in favor of the poor and marginalized.We describe the particular characteristics of our approach to this task. Specifically we (i) conducted a mapping of accountabilities in each of the contexts so as to understand how our actions may interact with existing accountability mechanisms (ii) developed detailed theories of change that unpacked the mechanisms through which we anticipated the community scorecards would have effect, as well as how they would be institutionalized; and (iii) monitored closely the extent of inclusion and the equity effects of the scorecards. In summarizing this approach, we articulate the contributions made by different papers in this volume.

Social accountability for reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health: A review of reviews

Globally, increasing efforts have been made to hold duty-bearers to account for their commitments to improve reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (RMNCAH) over the past two decades, including via social accountability approaches: citizen-led, collective processes for holding duty-bearers to account. There have been many individual studies and several reviews of social accountability approaches but the implications of their findings to inform future accountability efforts are not clear. We addressed this gap by conducting a review of reviews in order to summarise the current evidence on social accountability for RMNCAH, identify factors contributing to intermediary outcomes and health impacts, and identify future research and implementation priorities. The review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42019134340). We searched eight databases and systematic review repositories and sought expert recommendations for published and unpublished reviews, with no date or language restrictions. Six reviews were analysed using narrative synthesis: four on accountability or social accountability approaches for RMNCAH, and two specifically examining perinatal mortality audits, from which we extracted information relating to community involvement in audits. Our findings confirmed that there is extensive and growing evidence for social accountability approaches, particularly community monitoring interventions. Few documented social accountability approaches to RMNCAH achieve transformational change by going beyond information-gathering and awareness-raising, and attention to marginalised and vulnerable groups, including adolescents, has not been well documented. Drawing generalisable conclusions about results was difficult, due to inconsistent nomenclature and gaps in reporting, particularly regarding objectives, contexts, and health impacts. Promising approaches for successful social accountability initiatives include careful tailoring to the social and political context, strategic planning, and multi-sectoral/multi-stakeholder approaches. Future primary research could advance the evidence by describing interventions and their results in detail and in their contexts, focusing on factors and processes affecting acceptability, adoption, and effectiveness.

Tracking health sector priority setting processes and outcomes for human resources for health, five-years after political devolution: a county-level case study in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Health sector priority setting in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) entails balancing between a high demand and low supply of scarce resources. Human Resources for Health (HRH) consume the largest allocation of health sector resources in LMICs. Health sector decentralization continues to be promoted for its perceived ability to improve efficiency, relevance and participation in health sector priority setting. Following the 2013 devolution in Kenya, both health service delivery and human resource management were decentralized to county level. Little is known about priority setting practices and outcomes of HRH within decentralized health systems in LMICs. Our study sought to examine if and how the Kenyan devolution has improved health sector priority setting practices and outcomes for HRH.

METHODS

We used a mixed methods case study design to examine health sector priority setting practices and outcomes at county level in Kenya. We used three sources of data. First, we reviewed all relevant national and county level policy and guidelines documents relating to HRH management. We then accessed and reviewed county records of HRH recruitment and distribution between 2013 and 2018. We finally conducted eight key informant interviews with various stakeholder involved in HRH priority setting within our study county.

RESULTS

We found that HRH numbers in the county increased by almost two-fold since devolution. The county had two forms of HRH recruitment: one led by the County Public Services Board as outlined by policy and guidelines and a parallel, politically-driven recruitment done directly by the County Department of Health. Though there were clear guidelines on HRH recruitment, there were no similar guidelines on allocation and distribution of HRH. Since devolution, the county has preferentially staffed higher level hospitals over primary care facilities. Additionally, there has been local county level innovations to address some HRH management challenges, including recruiting doctors and other highly specialized staff on fixed term contract as opposed to permanent basis; and implementation of local incentives to attract and retain HRH to remote areas within the county.

CONCLUSION

Devolution has significantly increased county level decision-space for HRH priority setting in Kenya. However, HRH management and accountability challenges still exist at the county level. There is need for interventions to strengthen county level HRH management capacity and accountability mechanisms beyond additional resources allocation. This will boost the realization of the country's efforts for promoting service delivery equity as a key goal - both for the devolution and the country's quest towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC).

A strategic approach to social accountability: Bwalo forums within the reproductive maternal and child health accountability ecosystem in Malawi

BACKGROUND

The majority of documented social accountability initiatives to date have been 'tactical' in nature, employing single-tool, mostly community-based approaches. This article provides lessons from a 'strategic', multi-tool, multi-level social accountability project: UNICEF's 'Social Accountability for Every Woman Every Child' intervention in Malawi.

METHODS

The project targeted the national, district and community levels. Three Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) were engaged to carry out interventions using various tools to generate evidence and political advocacy at one or more levels. This article focuses on one of the social accountability methods - the bwalo forum (a meeting based on a traditional Malawian method of dialogue). A detailed political economy analysis was conducted by one of the co-authors using qualitative methods including interviews and group discussions. The authors conducted in-country consultations and analysed secondary data provided by the CSOs.

RESULTS

The political economy analysis highlighted several ways in which CSO partners should modify their work plans to be more compatible with the project context. This included shifting the advocacy and support focus, as well as significantly expanding the bwalo forums. Bwalos were found to be an important platform for allowing citizens to engage with duty bearers at the community and district levels, and enabled a number of reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health issues to be resolved at those levels. The project also enabled learning around participant responses as intermediate project outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The project utilised various tools to gather data, elevate community voices, and facilitate engagement between citizen and state actors at the community, district and national levels. This provided the scaffolding for numerous issues to be resolved at the community or district levels, or referred to the national level. Bwalo forums were found to be highly effective as a space for inter-level engagement between citizens and state; however, as they were not embedded in existing local structures, their potential for sustainability and scalability was tenuous. A key strength of the project was the political economy analysis, which provided direction for partners to shape their interventions according to local and national realities and be sensitive to the barriers and drivers to positive action.

Can social accountability improve access to free public health care for the poor? Analysis of three Health Equity Fund configurations in Cambodia, 2015–17

Within the context of universal health coverage, community participation has been identified as instrumental to facilitate access to health services. Social accountability whereby citizens hold providers and policymakers accountable is one popular approach. This article describes one example, that of Community-Managed Health Equity Funds (CMHEFs), as an approach to community engagement in Cambodia to improve poor people’s use of their entitlement to fee-free health care at public health facilities. The objectives of this article are to describe the size of its operations and its ability to enable poor people continued access to health care. Using data collected routinely, we compare the uptake of curative health services by eligible poor people under three configurations of Health Equity Funds (HEFs) during a 24-month period (July 2015–June 2017): Standard HEF that operated without community engagement, Mature CMHEFs established years before the study period and New CMHEFs initiated just before the study period. One year within the study, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) stopped operating the HEF nationwide and only the community-participation aspects of New CMHEF continued receiving technical assistance from an NGO. Using utilization figures for curative services by non-poor people for comparison, following the cessation of HEF management by the NGOs, outpatient consultation figures declined for all three configurations in comparison with the year before but only significantly for Standard HEF. The three HEF configurations experienced a highly statistically significant reduction in monthly inpatient admissions following halting of NGO management of HEFs. This study shows that enhancing access to free health care through social accountability is optimized at health centres through engagement of a wide range of community representatives. Such effect at hospitals was only observed to a limited extent, suggesting the need for more engagement of hospital management authorities in social accountability mechanisms.

Local health governance in Tajikistan: accountability and power relations at the district level

Background

Relationships of power, responsibility and accountability between health systems actors are considered central to health governance. Despite increasing attention to the role of accountability in health governance a gap remains in understanding how local accountability relations function within the health system in Central Asia. This study addresses this gap by exploring local health governance in two districts of Tajikistan using principal-agent theory.

Methods

This comparative case study uses a qualitative research methodology, relying on key informant interviews and focus group discussions with local stakeholders. Data analysis was guided by a framework that conceptualises governance as a series of principal-agent relations between state actors, citizens and health providers. Special attention is paid to voice, answerability and enforceability as crucial components of accountability.

Results

The analysis has provided insight into the challenges to different components making up an effective accountability relationship, such as an unclear mandate, the lack of channels for voice or insufficient resources to carry out a mandate. The findings highlight the weak position of health providers and citizens towards state actors and development agents in the under-resourced health system and authoritarian political context. Contestation over resources among local government actors, and informal tools for answerability and enforceability were found to play an important role in shaping actual accountability relations. These accountability relationships form a complex institutional web in which agents are subject to various accountability demands. Particularly health providers find themselves to be in this role, being held accountable by state actors, citizens and development agencies. The latter were found to have established parallel principal-agent relationships with health providers without much attention to the role of local state actors, or strengthening the short accountability route from citizens to providers.

Conclusion

The study has provided insight into the complexity of local governance relations and constraints to formal accountability processes. This has underlined the importance of informal accountability tools and the political-economic context in shaping principal-agent relations. The study has served to demonstrate the use and limitations of agency theory in health governance analysis, and points to the importance of entrenched positions of power in local health systems.

Building a transformative agenda for accountability in SRHR: lessons learned from SRHR and accountability literatures

Global strategies and commitments for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) underscore the need to strengthen rights-based accountability processes. Yet there are gaps between these ambitious SRHR rights frameworks and the constrained socio-political lived realities within which these frameworks are implemented. This paper addresses these gaps by reviewing the evidence on the dynamics and concerns related to operationalising accountability in the context of SRHR. It is based on a secondary analysis of a systematic review that examined the published evidence on SRHR and accountability and also draws on the broader literature on accountability for health. Key themes include the political and ideological context, enhancing community voice and health system responsiveness, and recognising the complexity of health systems. While there is a range of accountability relationships that can be leveraged in the health system, the characteristics specific to SRHR need to be considered as they colour the capabilities and conditions in which accountability efforts occur.

Understanding the implications of the Sustainable Development Goals for health policy and systems research: results of a research priority setting exercise

BACKGROUND

Given the paradigmatic shift represented by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as compared to the Millennium Development Goals - in particular their broad and interconnected nature - a new set of health policy and systems research (HPSR) priorities are needed to inform strategies to address these interconnected goals.

OBJECTIVES

To identify high priority HPSR questions linked to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

METHODS

We focused on three themes that we considered to be central to achieving the health related SDGs: (i) Protecting and promoting access to health services through systems of social protection (ii) Strengthening multisectoral collaborations for health and (iii) Developing more participatory and accountable institutions. We conducted 54 semi-structured interviews and two focus group discussions to investigate policy-maker perspectives on evidence needs. We also conducted an overview of literature reviews in each theme. Information from these sub-studies was extracted into a matrix of possible research questions and developed into three domain-specific lists of 30-36 potential priority questions. Topic experts from the global research community then refined and ranked the proposed questions through an online platform. A final webinar on each theme sought feedback on findings.

RESULTS

Policy-makers continue to demand HPSR for many well-established issues such as health financing, human resources for health, and service delivery. In terms of service delivery, policy-makers wanted to know how best to strengthen primary health care and community-based systems. In the themes of social protection and multisectoral collaboration, prioritized questions had a strong emphasis on issues of practical implementation. For participatory and accountable institutions, the two priority questions focused on political factors affecting the adoption of accountability measures, as well as health worker reactions to such measures.

CONCLUSIONS

To achieve the SDGs, there is a continuing need for research in some already well established areas of HPSR as well as key areas highlighted by decision-makers. Identifying appropriate conceptual frameworks as well as typologies of examples may be a prerequisite for answering some of the substantive policymaker questions. In addition, implementation research engaging non-traditional stakeholders outside of the health sector will be critical.

Rethinking collaboration: developing a learning platform to address under-five mortality in Mpumalanga province, South Africa

Following 50 years of apartheid, South Africa introduced visionary health policy committing to the right to health as part of a primary health care (PHC) approach. Implementation is seriously challenged, however, in an often-dysfunctional health system with scarce resources and a complex burden of avoidable mortality persists. Our aim was to develop a process generating evidence of practical relevance on implementation processes among people excluded from access to health systems. Informed by health policy and systems research, we developed a collaborative learning platform in which we worked as co-researchers with health authorities in a rural province. This article reports on the process and insights brought by health systems stakeholders. Evidence gaps on under-five mortality were identified with a provincial Directorate after which we collected quantitative and qualitative data. We applied verbal autopsy to quantify levels, causes and circumstances of deaths and participatory action research to gain community perspectives on the problem and priorities for action. We then re-convened health systems stakeholders to analyse and interpret these data through which several systems issues were identified as contributory to under-five deaths: staff availability and performance; service organization and infrastructure; multiple parallel initiatives; and capacity to address social determinants. Recommendations were developed ranging from immediate low- and no-cost re-organization of services to those where responses from higher levels of the system or outside were required. The process was viewed as acceptable and relevant for an overburdened system operating 'in the dark' in the absence of local data. Institutional infrastructure for evidence-based decision-making does not exist in many health systems. We developed a process connecting research evidence on rural health priorities with the means for action and enabled new partnerships between communities, authorities and researchers. Further development is planned to understand potential in deliberative processes for rural PHC.