Caregivers’ Compliance and Perception of Daycare Centers:A Community-Based Childhood Drowning Prevention Intervention Implemented in Rural Bangladesh

Drowning was one of the most prevalent causes of death worldwide for children under five in 2020. Drowning was the second leading cause of death for children under five in Bangladesh, while 58% of all deaths in the 1–5 years old age group resulted from drowning. Adult supervision helps prevent child drowning in rural areas where water bodies are easily accessible and located very close to homes. This paper aims to assess caregivers’ compliance and perception of community daycare centers in rural Bangladesh, piloted as a child drowning prevention intervention. In this longitudinal study, each child enrolled in the daycare intervention was visited and data on compliance and satisfaction with the daycare were collected. Descriptive statistics on daycare attendance, patterns of supervision, and caregivers’ perceptions about daycare were reported. When inquired about daycare attendance (n = 226,552), a total of 77.4% of children (n = 175,321) were found to attend daycare. The distance from homes and an adult’s unavailability to take the child to daycare were the most common reasons for not attending or discontinuing enrollment. The majority of children (76.4%) were supervised by their mothers during daycare closures. A total of 67.7% of respondents perceived daycare to be a safe place, where children also developed cognitive (51.7%) and social skills (50.6%). There were no incidences of drowning among children while attending daycare. Rural families were found to be compliant with the daycare and professed it to be a safe place protecting children from drowning and other injuries, while allowing them to focus on household chores or income-generating activities. These findings indicate a potential for the expansion of this intervention in rural Bangladesh and similar settings

Integration measurement and its applications in low- and middle-income country health systems: a scoping review

Abstract Background Despite growing interest in and commitment to integration, or integrated care, the concept is ill-defined and the resulting evidence base fragmented, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Underlying this challenge is a lack of coherent approaches to measure the extent of integration and how this influences desired outcomes. The aim of this scoping review is to identify measurement approaches for integration in LMICs and map them for future use. Methods Arksey and O’Malley’s framework for scoping reviews was followed. We conducted a systematic search of peer-reviewed literature measuring integration in LMICs across three databases and screened identified papers by predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A modified version of the Rainbow Model for Integrated Care guided charting and analysis of the data. Results We included 99 studies. Studies were concentrated in the Africa region and most frequently focused on the integration of HIV care with other services. A range of definitions and methods were identified, with no single approach for the measurement of integration dominating the literature. Measurement of clinical integration was the most common, with indicators focused on measuring receipt of two or more services provided at a single point of time. Organizational and professional integration indicators were focused on inter- and intra-organizational communication, collaboration, coordination, and continuity of care, while functional integration measured common information systems or patient records. Gaps were identified in measuring systems and normative integration. Few tools were validated or publicly available for future use. Conclusion We identified a wide range of recent approaches used to measure integration in LMICs. Our findings underscore continued challenges with lack of conceptual cohesion and fragmentation which limits how integration is understood in practice

Prioritizing rehabilitation in low- and middle-income country national health systems: a qualitative thematic synthesis and development of a policy framework

Abstract Background There is a large and growing unmet need for rehabilitation – a diverse category of services that aim to improve functioning across the life course – particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Yet despite urgent calls to increase political commitment, many low- and middle-income country governments have dedicated little attention to expanding rehabilitation services. Existing policy scholarship explains how and why health issues reach the policy agenda and offers applicable evidence to advance access to physical, medical, psychosocial, and other types of rehabilitation services. Drawing from this scholarship and empirical data on rehabilitation, this paper proposes a policy framework to understand national-level prioritization of rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries. Methods We conducted key informant interviews with rehabilitation stakeholders in 47 countries, complemented by a purposeful review of peer-reviewed and gray literature to achieve thematic saturation. We analyzed the data abductively using a thematic synthesis methodology. Rehabilitation-specific findings were triangulated with policy theory and empirical case studies on the prioritization of other health issues to develop the framework. Results The novel policy framework includes three components which shape the prioritization of rehabilitation on low- and middle-income countries’ national government’s health agendas. First, rehabilitation lacks a consistent problem definition, undermining the development of consensus-driven solutions which could advance the issue on policy agendas. Second, governance arrangements are fragmented within and across government ministries, between the government and its citizens, and across national and transnational actors engaged in rehabilitation service provision. Third, national legacies – particularly from civil conflict – and weaknesses in the existing health system influences both rehabilitation needs and implementation feasibility. Conclusions This framework can support stakeholders in identifying the key components impeding prioritization for rehabilitation across different national contexts. This is a crucial step for ultimately better advancing the issue on national policy agendas and improving equity in access to rehabilitation services