Cost of malaria morbidity in Uganda

The high burden of malaria, among others, is a key challenge to both human and economic development in malaria endemic countries. The impact of malaria can be categorized from three dimensions, namely: health, social and economic. The economic dimension focuses on three types of effects, namely: direct, indirect and intangible effects which are felt at both macro and micro levels. The objective of this study was to estimate the costs of malaria morbidity in Uganda using the cost-of-illness approach. The study covered 4 districts, which were selected randomly after stratification by malaria endemicity into Hyper endemic (Kamuli and Mubende districts); Meso endemic (Mubende) and Hypo endemic (Kabale). A survey was undertaken to collect data on cost of illness at the household level while data on institutional costs was collected from the Ministry of Health and Development Partners. Our study revealed that: (i) in 2003, the Ugandan economy lost a total of about US$658,200,599 (US$24.8 per capita) due to 12,343,411 cases malaria; (ii) the total consisted of US$49,122,349 (7$ 609,078,209 (92%) indirect costs or productivity losses; (iv) the total malaria treatment-related spending was US$46,134,999; out of which 90$2,987,351 was spent on malaria prevention; out of which 81% was borne by MOH and development partners.  Malaria poses a heavy economic burden on households, which may expose them to financial catastrophe and impoverishment. This calls for the upholding of the no-user fees policy as well as increased investments in improving access to quality of health services and to proven community preventive interventions in order to further reduce the cost of illness borne by patients and their families. Key words: Cost of illness, malaria, Ugand

Do guidelines influence the implementation of health programs? — Uganda’s experience

Abstract Background A guideline contains processes and procedures intended to guide health service delivery. However, the presence of guidelines may not guarantee their implementation, which may be a result of weaknesses in the development process. This study was undertaken to describe the processes of developing health planning, services management, and clinical guidelines within the health sector in Uganda, with the goal of understanding how these processes facilitate or abate the utility of guidelines. Methods Qualitative and quantitative research methods were used to collect and analyze data. Data collection was undertaken at the levels of the central Ministry of Health, the district, and service delivery. Qualitative methods included review of documents, observations, and key informant interviews, as well as quantitative aspects included counting guidelines. Quantitative data were analyzed with Microsoft Excel, and qualitative data were analyzed using deductive content thematic analysis. Results There were 137 guidelines in the health sector, with programs related to Millennium Development Goals having the highest number (n = 83). The impetus for guideline development was stated in 78% of cases. Several guidelines duplicated content, and some conflicted with each other. The level of consultation varied, and some guidelines did not consider government-wide policies and circumstances at the service delivery level. Booklets were the main format of presentation, which was not tailored to the service delivery level. There was no framework for systematic dissemination, and target users were defined broadly in most cases. Over 60% of guidelines available at the central level were not available at the service delivery level, but there were good examples in isolated cases. There was no framework for systematic monitoring of use, evaluation, and review of guidelines. Suboptimal performance of the supervision framework that would encourage the use of guidelines, assess their utilization, and provide feedback was noted. Conclusions Guideline effectiveness is compromised by the development process. To ensure the production of high-quality guidelines, efforts must be employed at the country and regional levels. The regional level can facilitate pooling resources and expertise in knowledge generation, methodology development, guideline repositories, and capacity building. Countries should establish and enforce systems and guidance on guideline development.</p