Enabling cross-country learning and exchange to support universal health coverage implementation

As countries transition from external assistance while pursuing ambitious plans to achieve universal health coverage (UHC), there is increasing need to facilitate knowledge sharing and learning among them. Country-led and country-owned knowledge management is foundational to sustainable, more equitable external assistance for health and is a useful complement to more conventional capacity-building modalities provided under external assistance. In the context of external assistance, few initiatives use country-to-country sharing of practitioner experiences, and link learning to receiving guidance on how to adapt, apply and sustain policy changes. Dominant knowledge exchange processes are didactic, implicitly assuming static technical needs, and that practitioners in low- and middle-income countries require problem-specific, time-bound solutions. In reality, the technical challenges of achieving UHC and the group of policymakers involved continuously evolve. This paper aims to explore factors which are supportive of experience-based knowledge exchange between practitioners from diverse settings, drawing from the experience of the Joint Learning Network (JLN) for UHC-a global network of practitioners and policymakers sharing experiences about common challenges to develop and implement knowledge products supporting reforms for UHC-as an illustration of a peer-to-peer learning approach. This paper considers: (1) an analysis of JLN monitoring and evaluation data between 2020 and 2023 and (2) a qualitative inquiry to explore policymakers' engagement with the JLN using semi-structured interviews (n = 14) with stakeholders from 10 countries. The JLN's experience provides insights to factors that contribute to successful peer-to-peer learning approaches. JLN relies on engaging a network of practitioners with diverse experiences who organically identify and pursue a common learning agenda. Meaningful peer-to-peer learning requires dynamic, structured interactions, and alignment with windows of opportunity for implementation that enable rapid response to emerging and timely issues. Peer-to-peer learning can facilitate in-country knowledge sharing, learning and catalyse action at the institutional and health system levels.

Health financing policies during the COVID-19 pandemic and implications for universal health care: a case study of 15 countries

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic was a health emergency requiring rapid fiscal resource mobilisation to support national responses. The use of effective health financing mechanisms and policies, or lack thereof, affected the impact of the pandemic on the population, particularly vulnerable groups and individuals. We provide an overview and illustrative examples of health financing policies adopted in 15 countries during the pandemic, develop a framework for resilient health financing, and use this pandemic to argue a case to move towards universal health coverage (UHC).

METHODS

In this case study, we examined the national health financing policy responses of 15 countries, which were purposefully selected countries to represent all WHO regions and have a range of income levels, UHC index scores, and health system typologies. We did a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed articles, policy documents, technical reports, and publicly available data on policy measures undertaken in response to the pandemic and complemented the data obtained with 61 in-depth interviews with health systems and health financing experts. We did a thematic analysis of our data and organised key themes into a conceptual framework for resilient health financing.

FINDINGS

Resilient health financing for health emergencies is characterised by two main phases: (1) absorb and recover, where health systems are required to absorb the initial and subsequent shocks brought about by the pandemic and restabilise from them; and (2) sustain, where health systems need to expand and maintain fiscal space for health to move towards UHC while building on resilient health financing structures that can better prepare health systems for future health emergencies. We observed that five key financing policies were implemented across the countries-namely, use of extra-budgetary funds for a swift initial response, repurposing of existing funds, efficient fund disbursement mechanisms to ensure rapid channelisation to the intended personnel and general population, mobilisation of the private sector to mitigate the gaps in public settings, and expansion of service coverage to enhance the protection of vulnerable groups. Accountability and monitoring are needed at every stage to ensure efficient and accountable movement and use of funds, which can be achieved through strong governance and coordination, information technology, and community engagement.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that health systems need to leverage the COVID-19 pandemic as a window of opportunity to make health financing policies robust and need to politically commit to public financing mechanisms that work to prepare for future emergencies and as a lever for UHC.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Mitigating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable populations: Lessons for improving health and social equity

The COVID-19 pandemic had an inequitable and disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations, reversing decades of progress toward healthy populations and poverty alleviation. This study examines various programmatic tools and policy measures used by governments to support vulnerable populations during the pandemic. A comparative case study of 15 countries representing all World Health Organization's regions offers a comprehensive picture of countries with varying income statuses, health system arrangements and COVID-19 public health measures. Through a systematic desk review and key informant interviews, we report a spectrum of mitigation strategies deployed in these countries to address five major types of vulnerabilities (health, economic, social, institutional and communicative). We found a multitude of strategies that supported vulnerable populations such as migrant workers, sex workers, prisoners, older persons and school-going children. Prioritising vulnerable populations during the early phase of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, direct financial subsidies and food assistance programmes were the most common measures reported. Additionally, framing public health information and implementing culturally sensitive health promotion interventions helped bridge the communication barriers in certain instances. However, these measures remain insufficient to protect vulnerable populations comprehensively. Our findings point to the need to expand fiscal space for health, enlarge healthcare coverage, incorporate equity principles in all policies, leverage technology, multi-stakeholder co-production of policies and tailored community engagement mechanisms.

Emerging challenges in implementing universal health coverage in Asia

As countries in Asia converge on the goal of universal health coverage (UHC), some common challenges are emerging. One is how to ensure coverage of the informal sector so as to make UHC truly universal; a second is how to design a benefit package that is responsive and appropriate to current health challenges, yet fiscally sustainable; and a third is how to ensure "supply-side readiness", i.e. the availability and quality of services, which is a necessary condition for translating coverage into improvements in health outcomes. Using examples from the Asia region, this paper discusses these three challenges and how they are being addressed. On the first challenge, two promising approaches emerge: using general revenues to fully cover the informal sector, or employing a combination of tax subsidies, non-financial incentives and contributory requirements. The former can produce fast results, but places pressure on government budgets and may induce informality, while the latter will require a strong administrative mandate and systems to track the ability-to-pay. With respect to benefit packages, we find considerable variation in the nature and rigor of processes underlying the selection and updating of the services included. Also, in general, packages do not yet focus sufficiently on non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and related preventive outpatient care. Finally, there are large variations and inequities in the supply-side readiness, in terms of availability of infrastructure, equipment, essential drugs and staffing, to deliver on the promises of UHC. Health worker competencies are also a constraint. While the UHC challenges are common, experience in overcoming these challenges is varied and many of the successes appear to be highly context-specific. This implies that researchers and policymakers need to rigorously, and regularly, assess different approaches, and share these findings across countries in Asia - and across the world.