The unfunded priorities: an evaluation of priority setting for noncommunicable disease control in Uganda

The epidemiology of behavioral risk factors for noncommunicable disease and hypertension: A cross-sectional study from Eastern Uganda

In light of the suboptimal noncommunicable disease (NCD) risk factor surveillance efforts, the study's main objectives were to: (i) characterize the epidemiological profile of NCD risk factors; (ii) estimate the prevalence of hypertension; and (iii) identify factors associated with hypertension in a peri-urban and rural Ugandan population. A population-based cross-sectional survey of adults was conducted at the Iganga-Mayuge Health and Demographic Surveillance System site in eastern Uganda. After describing sociodemographic characteristics, the prevalence of NCD risk factors and hypertension was reported. Prevalence ratios for NCD risk factors were calculated using weighted Poisson regression to identify factors associated with hypertension. Among 3220 surveyed respondents (mean age: 35.3 years (standard error: 0.1), 49.4% males), 4.4% were current tobacco users, 7.7% were current drinkers, 98.5% had low fruit and vegetable consumption, 26.9% were overweight, and 9.3% were obese. There was a high prevalence of hypertension and prehypertension, at 17.1% and 48.8%, respectively. Among hypertensive people, most had uncontrolled hypertension, at 97.4%. When we examined associated factors, older age (adjusted prevalence ratio (APR): 3.1, 95% CI: 2.2-4.4, APR: 5.2, 95% CI: 3.7-7.3, APR: 8.9, 95% CI: 6.4-12.5 among 30-44, 45-59, and 60+-year-old people than 18-29-year-olds), alcohol drinking (APR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.3-2.0, ref: no), always adding salt during eating (APR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.2, ref: no), poor physical activity (APR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.1-1.6, ref: no), overweight (APR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.1-1.5, ref: normal weight), and obesity (APR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.6-2.4, ref: normal weight) had higher prevalence of hypertension than their counterparts. The high prevalence of NCD risk factors highlights the immediate need to implement and scale-up population-level strategies to increase awareness about leading NCD risk factors in Uganda. These strategies should be accompanied by concomitant investment in building health systems capacity to manage and control NCDs.

Geographical, sex, and socioeconomic differences in non-communicable disease indicators: A cross-sectional survey in Eastern Uganda

The prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is increasing in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study examined differences in the burden of NCDs and their risk factors according to geographic, sex, and sociodemographic characteristics in a rural and peri-urban community in Eastern Uganda. We compared the prevalence by sex, location, wealth, and education. Unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) were reported. Indicators related to tobacco use, alcohol use, salt consumption, fruit/vegetable consumption, physical activity, body weight, and blood pressure were assessed. Among 3220 people (53.3% males, mean age: 35.3 years), the prevalence of NCD burden differed by sex. Men had significantly higher tobacco (e.g., current smoking: 7.6% vs. 0.7%, adjusted PR (APR): 12.8, 95% CI: 7.4-22.3), alcohol use (e.g., current drinker: 11.1% vs. 4.6%, APR: 13.4, 95% CI: 7.9-22.7), and eat processed food high in salt (13.4% vs. 7.1, APR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.4-2.4) than women; however, the prevalence of overweight (23.1% vs 30.7%, APR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6-0.9) and obesity (4.1% vs 14.7%, APR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.2-0.3) was lower among men than women. Comparing locations, peri-urban residents had a higher prevalence of current alcohol drinking, heavy episodic drinking, always/often adding salt while cooking, always eating processed foods high in salt, poor physical activity, obesity, prehypertension, and hypertension than rural residents (p<0.5). When comparing respondents by wealth and education, we found people who have higher wealth or education had a higher prevalence of always/often adding salt while cooking, poor physical activity, and obesity. Although the findings were inconsistent, we observed significant sociodemographic and socioeconomic differences in the burden of many NCDs, including differences in the distributions of behavioral risk factors. Considering the high burden of many risk factors, we recommend appropriate prevention programs and policies to reduce these risk factors' burden and future negative consequences.

How did European countries set health priorities in response to the COVID-19 threat? A comparative document analysis of 24 pandemic preparedness plans across the EURO region

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced governments across the world to consider how to prioritise the allocation of scarce resources. There are many tools and frameworks that have been designed to assist with the challenges of priority setting in health care. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which formal priority setting was evident in the pandemic plans produced by countries in the World Health Organisation's EURO region, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. This compliments analysis of similar plans produced in other regions of the world. Twenty four pandemic preparedness plans were obtained that had been published between March and September 2020. For data extraction, we applied a framework for identifying and assessing the elements of good priority setting to each plan, before conducting comparative analysis across the sample. Our findings suggest that while some pre-requisites for effective priority setting were present in many cases - including political commitment and a recognition of the need for allocation decisions - many other hallmarks were less evident, such as explicit ethical criteria, decision making frameworks, and engagement processes. This study provides a unique insight into the role of priority setting in the European response to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A global comparative analysis of the the inclusion of priority setting in national COVID-19 pandemic plans: A reflection on the methods and the accessibility of the plans

BACKGROUND

Despite the swift governments' response to the COVID-19 pandemic, there remains a paucity of literature assessing the degree to which; priority setting (PS) was included in the pandemic plans and the pandemic plans were publicly accessible. This paper reflects on the methods employed in a global comparative analysis of the degree to which countries integrated PS into their COVID-19 pandemic plans based on Kapiriri & Martin's framework. We also assessed if the accessibility of the plans was related to the country's transparency index.

METHODS

Through a three stage search strategy, we accessed and reviewed 86 national COVID-19 pandemic plans (and 11 Canadian provinces and territories). Secondary analysis assessed any alignment between the readily accessible plans and the country's transparency index.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

71 national plans were readily accessible while 43 were not. There were no systematic differences between the countries whose plans were readily available and those whose plans were 'missing'. However, most of the countries with 'missing' plans tended to have a low transparency index. The framework was adapted to the pandemic context by adding a parameter on the need to plan for continuity of priority routine services. While document review may be the most feasible and appropriate approach to conducting policy analysis during health emergencies, interviews and follow up document review would assess policy implementation.

[Evolution and Application of Disease Control Priorities]

Disease control priority (DCP) is an important public health intervention strategy. Diseases that should be prioritized for prevention and control are first screened with a series of criteria, including the severity of the disease burden, the effectiveness of disease control technologies, the prevention and control capacity of the existing health system, etc. Then, the prevention and control technologies for these diseases undergo qualitative evaluation (eg, face-to-face interviews, expert consultation, workshops, etc) and quantitative evaluation (eg, cost-benefit analysis, multi-criteria decision analysis, etc). Finally, the public health initiatives that should be prioritized are identified. From the conception of the idea, to the formal proposition of the concept, to guidance for practice, DCP has gone through more than 70 years of development. Through DCP, significant contributions has been made to improving the efficiency of health care service systems and promoting the health of populations in developing countries. Herein, we systematically reviewed the background, development history, realization method, and practical applications of DCP, focusing on exploring the application potential of DCP in health governance and providing technical support and decision-making reference for the comprehensive promotion of the Healthy China Initiative.

Local governance and financial distress in local governments: the mediating role of delivery system

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to establish the mediating role of local government delivery system (here after delivery system) in the relationship between local governance (hereafter, governance) and financial distress of local governments in Uganda.

Design/methodology/approach

This study is correlational and cross-sectional. It uses a questionnaire survey on a sample of 109 local governments (districts) of Uganda. The data are analysed using SPSS, partial least squares structural equation modelling and Jose’s MedGraph.

Findings

Results indicate that government delivery system mediates the relationship between governance and financial distress. Delivery system in terms of capacity development and community participation causes positive variances in local government’s financial distress. Also, governance in terms of political clientelism significantly contributes to financial distress more than oversight mechanisms and audit quality. The study finds that delivery system causes more variance in financial distress than governance.

Originality/value

This study applies the new public management and network governance theory and tests the efficacy of delivery system and governance on financial distress in one-go and succeeded in explaining financial distress of local government using Uganda as the setting; the authors join previous scholars that root for multi-theoretical approaches. Also, this study’s design has allowed for the consideration of more than simply the main effects of governance and delivery systems by exploring the mediating role of delivery systems in the link between governance and financial distress. As such, the authors may now have a more accurate and detailed description of the relationships between governance, delivery system and local government financial distress.

Priority setting for pandemic preparedness and response: A comparative analysis of COVID-19 pandemic plans in 12 countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted health systems and exacerbated pre-existing resource gaps in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (WHO-EMRO). Active humanitarian and refugee crises have led to mass population displacement and increased health system fragility, which has implication for equitable priority setting (PS). We examine whether and how PS was included in national COVID-19 pandemic plans within EMRO.

Methods

An analysis of COVID-19 pandemic response and preparedness planning documents from a sample of 12/22 countries in WHO-EMRO. We assessed the degree to which documented PS processes adhere to twenty established quality parameters of effective PS.

Results

While all reviewed plans addressed some aspect of PS, none included all quality parameters. Yemen's plan included the highest number (9) of quality parameters, while Egypt's addressed the lowest (3). Most plans used evidence in their planning processes. While no plans explicitly identify equity as a criterion to guide PS; many identified vulnerable populations - a key component of equitable PS. Despite high concentrations of refugees, migrants, and IDPs in EMRO, only a quarter of the plans identified them as vulnerable.

Conclusion

PS setting challenges are exacerbated by conflict and the resulting health system fragmentation. Systematic and quality PS is essential to tackle long-term health implications of COVID-19 for vulnerable populations in this region, and to support effective PS and equitable resource allocation.

“By the time they run into the hospital, their life is already at stake”: a qualitative study of healthcare professional perceptions on priorities for cervical cancer policy in Uganda

Background

Cervical cancer (CxCa) incidence in Uganda is three times the global average and a leading cause of mortality for women. While there is funding and infrastructure to support HIV control in Uganda, these are not in place for CxCa prevention and control. This study was conducted to explore the knowledge and perceptions of HIV professionals in Uganda to identify perceived barriers and facilitators to CxCa screening and treatment among women living with HIV (WLHIV) as a basis to guide and inform policies and programs for CxCa prevention and control, including service integration.

Methods

This study used qualitative interviews to obtain primary data from professionals working in the HIV field in Uganda conducted from September 2020 to January 2022. Participants were identified through purposive and snowball sampling and consulted with colleagues at local service and academic agencies in Kampala. Both written and verbal informed consent was obtained. Hour-long interviews were conducted virtually and in person and recorded. Interviews consisted of open-ended questions exploring perspectives on, knowledge about, and practices surrounding HPV and CxCa among WLHIV in Uganda. Transcripts were analyzed and coded via MAXQDA software to identify facilitators and barriers to HPV vaccination, CxCa screening and treatment.

Results

Fifty key informant (KI) interviews were conducted. Analysis revealed two themes regarding priorities for cervical cancer policy in Uganda after KIs reflected on improving barriers to CxCa care. These were: (1) decentralization of care through integration of services and (2) leadership on a national level by increasing funding and organizing advocacy initiatives. Practical recommendations identified by KI that derived from these themes included leveraging community institutions and mass media campaigns to target misconceptions surrounding screening, making CxCa screening opt-out and integrated with HIV care, strengthening a centralized database, organizing mass roll-out of self-testing, and organizing training of healthcare workers.

Conclusions

Key informants call for solutions that address individual, community, and national barriers of cervical cancer care and emphasize the need for a strong national cervical cancer policy to coordinate currently fragmented services and the political will to adequately fund these.

Non-communicable disease policy implementation in Libya: A mixed methods assessment

The Libyan Ministry of Health is keen to understand how it can introduce policies to protect its population from non-communicable diseases (NCDs). We aimed to perform an implementation research assessment of the current situation, including challenges and opportunities. We used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. We started with a quantitative assessment of NCD policy performance based on review of the WHO NCD Progress Monitor Reports. Once we had identified Libya's NCD policy gaps we performed a systematic review to identify international lessons around barriers and successful strategies for the policies Libya has not yet implemented. Finally, we performed a series of key stakeholder interviews with senior policymakers to explore their perspectives around promising policy actions. We used a realist paradigm, methods triangulation, and a joint display to synthesise the interpretation of our findings and develop recommendations. Libya has not fully implemented any of the recommended policies for diet, physical activity, primary care guidelines & therapeutics, or data collection, targets & surveillance. It does not have robust tobacco policies in place. Evidence from the international literature and policymaker interviews emphasised the centrality of according strong political leadership, governance structures, multisectoral engagement, and adequate financing to policy development activities. Libya's complex political and security situation are major barriers for policy implementation. Whilst some policies will be very challenging to develop and deploy, there are a number of simple policy actions that could be implemented with minimum effort; from inviting WHO to conduct a second STEPS survey, to signing the international code on breast-milk substitutes. Like many other fragile and conflict-affected states, Libya has not accorded NCDs the policy attention they demand. Whilst strong high-level leadership is the ultimate key to providing adequate protections, there are a range of simple measures that can be implemented with relative ease.

Prioritizing Health-Sector Interventions for Noncommunicable Diseases and Injuries in Low- and Lower-Middle Income Countries: National NCDI Poverty Commissions

Noncommunicable Disease and Injury (NCDI) Poverty Commissions in 16 low- and middle-income countries provided evidence-based recommendations on a local, expanded set of priority NCDIs and health-sector interventions needed in national initiatives to attain universal health coverage. These commissions provide a collective platform for policy, research, and advocacy efforts to improve coverage of cost-effective and equitable health-sector interventions for populations living in extreme poverty.

Health sector priorities and interventions to prevent and manage noncommunicable diseases and injuries (NCDIs) in low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMICs) have primarily adopted elements of the World Health Organization Global Action Plan for NCDs 2013–2020. However, there have been limited efforts in LLMICs to prioritize among conditions and health-sector interventions for NCDIs based on local epidemiology and contextually relevant risk factors or that incorporate the equitable distribution of health outcomes. The Lancet Commission on Reframing Noncommunicable Diseases and Injuries for the Poorest Billion supported national NCDI Poverty Commissions to define local NCDI epidemiology, determine an expanded set of priority NCDI conditions, and recommend cost-effective, equitable health-sector interventions. Fifteen national commissions and 1 state-level commission were established from 2016–2019. Six commissions completed the prioritization exercise and selected an average of 25 NCDI conditions; 15 conditions were selected by all commissions, including asthma, breast cancer, cervical cancer, diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2, epilepsy, hypertensive heart disease, intracerebral hemorrhage, ischemic heart disease, ischemic stroke, major depressive disorder, motor vehicle road injuries, rheumatic heart disease, sickle cell disorders, and subarachnoid hemorrhage. The commissions prioritized an average of 35 health-sector interventions based on cost-effectiveness, financial risk protection, and equity-enhancing rankings. The prioritized interventions were estimated to cost an additional US$4.70–US$13.70 per capita or approximately 9.7%–35.6% of current total health expenditure (0.6%–4.0% of current gross domestic product). Semistructured surveys and qualitative interviews of commission representatives demonstrated positive outcomes in several thematic areas, including understanding NCDIs of poverty, informing national planning and implementation of NCDI health-sector interventions, and improving governance and coordination for NCDIs. Overall, national NCDI Poverty Commissions provided a platform for evidence-based, locally driven determination of priorities within NCDIs.

Priority Setting and Equity in COVID-19 Pandemic Plans: A Comparative Analysis of eighteen African Countries

Priority setting represents an even bigger challenge during public health emergencies than routine times. This is because such emergencies compete with routine programmes for the available health resources, strain health systems and shift health-care attention and resources towards containing the spread of the epidemic and treating those that fall seriously ill. This paper is part of a larger global study, the aim of which is to evaluate the degree to which national COVID-19 preparedness and response plans incorporated priority setting concepts. It provides important insights into what and how priority decisions were made in the context of a pandemic. Specifically, with a focus on a sample of 18 African countries’ pandemic plans, the paper aims to: (1) explore the degree to which the documented priority setting processes adhere to established quality indicators of effective priority setting and (2) examine if there is a relationship between the number of quality indicators present in the pandemic plans and the country’s economic context, health system and prior experiences with disease outbreaks. All the reviewed plans contained some aspects of expected priority setting processes but none of the national plans addressed all quality parameters. Most of the parameters were mentioned by less than 10 of the 18 country plans reviewed, and several plans identified one or two aspects of fair priority setting processes. Very few plans identified equity as a criterion for priority setting. Since the parameters are relevant to the quality of priority setting that is implemented during public health emergencies and most of the countries have pre-existing pandemic plans; it would be advisable that, for the future (if not already happening), countries consider priority setting as a critical part of their routine health emergency and disease outbreak plans. Such an approach would ensure that priority setting is integral to pandemic planning, response and recovery.

Stakeholder perceptions of current practices and challenges in priority setting for non-communicable disease control in Kenya: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the stakeholders' perceptions of current practices and challenges in priority setting for non-communicable disease (NCD) control in Kenya.

DESIGN

A qualitative study approach conducted within a 1-day stakeholder workshop that followed a deliberative dialogue process.

SETTING

Study was conducted within a 1-day stakeholder workshop that was held in October 2019 in Nairobi, Kenya.

PARTICIPANTS

Stakeholders who currently participate in the national level policymaking process for health in Kenya.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Priority setting process for NCD control in Kenya.

RESULTS

Donor funding was identified as a key factor that informed the priority setting process for NCD control. Misalignment between donors' priorities and the country's priorities for NCD control was seen as a hindrance to the process. It was identified that there was minimal utilisation of context-specific evidence from locally conducted research. Additional factors seen to inform the priority setting process included political leadership, government policies and budget allocation for NCDs, stakeholder engagement, media, people's cultural and religious beliefs.

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need for development aid partners to align their priorities to the specific NCD control priority areas that exist in the countries that they extend aid to. Additionally, context-specific scientific evidence on effective local interventions for NCD control is required to inform areas of priority in Kenya and other low-income and middle-income countries. Further research is needed to develop best practice guidelines and tools for the creation of national-level priority setting frameworks that are responsive to the identified factors that inform the priority setting process for NCD control.

Curbing the Rise of Noncommunicable Diseases in Uganda: Perspectives of Policy Actors

BACKGROUND

Uganda faces a complex policy landscape as it simultaneously addresses infectious diseases and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). The health system has been overwhelmed by the growing burden of NCDs across all socioeconomic strata. In this study, we sought to understand the policy context around NCDs in Uganda, the roles of actors both within and external to the government, and the factors shaping the development and implementation of NCD policies and programs in Uganda.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 policy actors from the Ugandan Ministry of Health (MOH), nongovernmental organizations, and academia to understand the roles of different actors in the Ugandan NCD space, the programs and policy measures in discussion, and how to bridge any identified gaps. A thematic data analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

All national actors viewed funding constraints as a critical barrier to developing and executing an NCD strategic plan and as a barrier to leading and coordinating NCD prevention and control efforts in Uganda. The crowding of nongovernment actors was found to fragment NCD efforts, particularly due to the weak implementation of a framework for action among NCD actors. Relatedly, limited recruitment of technical experts on NCDs within the MOH was viewed to further diminish the government's role in leading policy and program formulation and implementation. Though recent MOH efforts have aimed at addressing these concerns, some skepticism remains about the government's commitment to increase budgetary allocations for NCDs and to address the technical and human resources gaps needed to achieve NCD policy aims in Uganda.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the immediate need to mobilize more resources, reduce fragmented efforts in the NCD space, and prioritize investment in NCD prevention and management in Uganda.

National physical activity and sedentary behaviour policies in 76 countries: availability, comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness

Background

Evidence on current, national physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) policies is limited. We, therefore, analysed availability, comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness of PA and SB policies internationally.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, Global Observatory for Physical Activity (GoPA!) Country Contacts from 173 countries were asked to provide data on their national PA and SB policies by completing GoPA! Policy Inventory. Data were collected for 76 countries (response rate = 44%).

Results

Formal written policies for PA and SB were found in 92% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86, 98) and 62% (95% CI: 50, 75) of countries, respectively. Sixty-two percent (95% CI: 51, 73) of countries have national PA guidelines, while 40% (95% CI: 29, 52) have SB guidelines. Fifty-two (95% CI: 40, 64) and 11% (95% CI: 3, 19) of countries have quantifiable national targets for PA and SB, respectively. The most represented ministries/departments involved in the promotion of more PA and/or less SB were in the sport (reported by 99% countries; 95% CI: 96, 100), health (97%; 95% CI: 94, 100), education (94%; 95% CI: 88, 100), and recreation and leisure (85%; 95% CI: 71, 99) sectors. The median score (0–10) for the comprehensiveness of PA and SB policies was 4 (95% CI: 4, 5) and 2 (95% CI: 2, 3), respectively. For PA and SB policy implementation it was 6 (95% CI: 5, 6). For the effectiveness of PA and SB policies it was 4 (95% CI: 3, 5) and 3 (95% CI: 2, 4), respectively. PA and SB policies were generally best developed in high-income countries and countries of European and Western-Pacific regions.

Conclusions

Most of the included countries have PA policies, but their comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness are generally low-to-moderate. SB policies are less available, comprehensive, implemented, and effective than PA policies. PA and SB policies are better developed in high-income countries, compared with low- and lower-middle-income countries, and in countries of European and Western-Pacific regions, compared with other world regions. More investment is needed in development and implementation of comprehensive and effective PA and SB policies, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

Priority setting for health system strengthening in low income countries. A qualitative case study illustrating the complexities

Health systems are critical to the realisation of Universal Health Coverage. There has been insufficient attention to the evaluation of priority setting for health system strengthening within low income countries, including evaluation of the local capacity to implement priorities. This study evaluated the extent to which health system strengthening was prioritized in Uganda. The Kapiriri & Martin framework was used to evaluate health system priority setting from 2005-2015. A document analysis was triangulated with interview data (n = 67) from global, national and subnational stakeholders and analysed using content analysis. Health system strengthening was perceived to be circumvented by a lack of resources as well as influential actors with disease focused, rather than system-oriented, interests. There were defined processes with explicit criteria for identifying priorities and evidence was highly valued. But sub-optimal transparency and weak accountability often compromised the integrity of priority setting and contributed to stalling progress on health system strengthening and achieving health system outcomes. The strengths in the current planning processes should be harnessed. In addition, a systematic approach to priority setting, potentially through the establishment of an independent body, and stronger oversight mechanisms, would strengthen health system planning in this setting.

Priority setting for maternal, newborn and child health in Uganda: a qualitative study evaluating actual practice

Background

Despite continued investment, Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (MNCH) indicators in low and middle income countries have remained relatively poor. This could, in part, be explained by inadequate resources to adequately address these problems, inappropriate allocation of the available resources, or lack of implementation of the most effective interventions. Systematic priority setting and resource allocation could contribute to alleviating these limitations. There is a paucity of literature that follows through MNCH prioritization processes to implementation, making it difficult for policy makers to understand the impact of their decision-making on population health. The overall objective of this paper was to describe and evaluate priority setting for maternal, newborn and child health interventions in Uganda.

Methods

Fifty-four key informant interviews and a review of policies and media reports were used to describe priority setting for MNCH in Uganda. Kapiriri and Martin’s conceptual framework was used to evaluate priority setting for MNCH.

Results

There were three main prioritization exercises for maternal, newborn and child health in Uganda. The processes were participatory and were guided by explicit tools, evidence, and criteria, however, the public and the districts were insufficiently involved in the priority setting process. While there were conducive contextual factors including strong political support, implementation was constrained by the presence of competing actors, with varying priorities, an unequal allocation of resources between child health and maternal health interventions, limited financial and human resources, a weak health system and limited institutional capacity.

Conclusions

Stronger institutional capacity at the Ministry of Health and equitable engagement of key stakeholders in decision-making processes, especially the public, and implementers, would improve understanding, satisfaction and compliance with the priority setting process. Availability of financial and human resources that are appropriately allocated would facilitate the implementation of well-developed policies.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4170-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Priority setting for disease outbreaks in Uganda: A case study evaluating the process

Priority setting (PS) and resource allocation during health emergencies are key factors influencing an effective response. However, there is limited understanding of how priorities and resource allocation during disease outbreaks occur and the extent to which these processes are successful. This paper, based on 23 in-depth interviews with policy makers and a review of policy and emergency preparedness documents, used a PS evaluation framework to evaluate PS for disease outbreaks in Uganda. With regard to PS for disease outbreaks in Uganda, we identified a conducive socio-political-economical context, credible institutions, formal participatory prioritisation processes, evidence informed the processes, demonstrated implementation capacity, institutional strengthening and positive health outcomes. Factors that compromised the success of PS included limited resources - especially in between disease outbreaks and unfair processes. Investment in sustaining the established prioritisation infrastructure to oversee preparedness activities between the outbreaks would strengthen the prioritisation process. This should be supported with health system strengthening. The framework enabled us to evaluate some aspects of PS during disease outbreaks. The framework's inability to evaluate all aspects, and reported as opposed to actual PS calls for the integration of evaluation throughout the planning and implementation process to ensure validity and continuous implementation of improvement strategies.