Incidence and predictors of hospital readmission in children presenting with severe anaemia in Uganda and Malawi: a secondary analysis of TRACT trial data

Background: Severe anaemia (haemoglobin < 6 g/dL) is a leading cause of recurrent hospitalisation in African children. We investigated predictors of readmission in children hospitalised with severe anaemia in the TRACT trial (ISRCTN84086586) in order to identify potential future interventions. Methods: Secondary analyses of the trial examined 3894 children from Uganda and Malawi surviving a hospital episode of severe anaemia. Predictors of all-cause readmission within 180 days of discharge were identified using multivariable regression with death as a competing risk. Groups of children with similar characteristics were identified using hierarchical clustering. Results: Of the 3894 survivors 682 (18%) were readmitted; 403 (10%) had ≥2 re-admissions over 180 days. Three main causes of readmission were identified: severe anaemia (n = 456), malaria (n = 252) and haemoglobinuria/dark urine syndrome (n = 165). Overall, factors increasing risk of readmission included HIV-infection (hazard ratio 2.48 (95% CI 1.63–3.78), p < 0.001); ≥2 hospital admissions in the preceding 12 months (1.44(1.19–1.74), p < 0.001); history of transfusion (1.48(1.13–1.93), p = 0.005); and missing ≥1 trial medication dose (proxy for care quality) (1.43 (1.21–1.69), p < 0.001). Children with uncomplicated severe anaemia (Hb 4-6 g/dL and no severity features), who never received a transfusion (per trial protocol) during the initial admission had a substantially lower risk of readmission (0.67(0.47–0.96), p = 0.04). Malaria (among children with no prior history of transfusion) (0.60(0.47–0.76), p < 0.001); younger-age (1.07 (1.03–1.10) per 1 year younger, p < 0.001) and known sickle cell disease (0.62(0.46–0.82), p = 0.001) also decreased risk of readmission. For anaemia re-admissions, gross splenomegaly and enlarged spleen increased risk by 1.73(1.23–2.44) and 1.46(1.18–1.82) respectively compared to no splenomegaly. Clustering identified four groups of children with readmission rates from 14 to 20%. The cluster with the highest readmission rate was characterised by very low haemoglobin (mean 3.6 g/dL). Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) predominated in two clusters associated with chronic repeated admissions or severe, acute presentations in largely undiagnosed SCD. The final cluster had high rates of malaria (78%), severity signs and very low platelet count, consistent with acute severe malaria. Conclusions: Younger age, HIV infection and history of previous hospital admissions predicted increased risk of readmission. However, no obvious clinical factors for intervention were identified. As missing medication doses was highly predictive, attention to care related factors may be important. Trial registration: ISRCTN ISRCTN84086586. Keywords: Severe anaemia, Readmissio

The response to flexibility: Country intervention choices in the first four rounds of the GAVI Health Systems Strengthening applications

This article presents an analysis of the first four rounds of countries' funding applications. These requested funding for a variety of health system initiatives that reflected country-specific requirements, and were not limited to improving immunization coverage. Analyses identified a dominance of operational-level health service provision activities, and an absence of interventions related to demand and financing. While the proposed activities are only now being implemented, the results of this study provide evidence that the open application process employed by the HSS window has led to a shift in analysis and planning-from the programmatic to the systemic-in the countries whose applications have been approved. However, the proposed responses to identified constraints are dominated by short-term operational responses, rather than more complex, longer term approaches to health system strengthening

Interrogating the World Bank’s role in global health knowledge production, governance, and finance

Background In the nearly half century since it began lending for population projects, the World Bank has become one of the largest financiers of global health projects and programs, a powerful voice in shaping health agendas in global governance spaces, and a mass producer of evidentiary knowledge for its preferred global health interventions. How can social scientists interrogate the role of the World Bank in shaping ‘global health’ in the current era? Main body As a group of historians, social scientists, and public health officials with experience studying the effects of the institution’s investment in health, we identify three challenges to this research. First, a future research agenda requires recognizing that the Bank is not a monolith, but rather has distinct inter-organizational groups that have shaped investment and discourse in complicated, and sometimes contradictory, ways. Second, we must consider how its influence on health policy and investment has changed significantly over time. Third, we must analyze its modes of engagement with other institutions within the global health landscape, and with the private sector. The unique relationships between Bank entities and countries that shape health policy, and the Bank’s position as a center of research, permit it to have a formative influence on health economics as applied to international development. Addressing these challenges, we propose a future research agenda for the Bank’s influence on global health through three overlapping objects of and domains for study: knowledge-based (shaping health policy knowledge), governance-based (shaping health governance), and finance-based (shaping health financing). We provide a review of case studies in each of these categories to inform this research agenda. Conclusions As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage, and as state and non-state actors work to build more inclusive and robust health systems around the world, it is more important than ever to consider how to best document and analyze the impacts of Bank’s financial and technical investments in the Global South

An assessment of interactions between global health initiatives and country health systems

Since 2000, the emergence of several large disease-specific global health initiatives (GHIs) has changed the way in which international donors provide assistance for public health. Some critics have claimed that these initiatives burden health systems that are already fragile in countries with few resources, whereas others have asserted that weak health systems prevent progress in meeting disease-specific targets. So far, most of the evidence for this debate has been provided by speculation and anecdotes. We use a review and analysis of existing data, and 15 new studies that were submitted to WHO for the purpose of writing this Report to describe the complex nature of the interplay between country health systems and GHIs. We suggest that this Report provides the most detailed compilation of published and emerging evidence so far, and provides a basis for identification of the ways in which GHIs and health systems can interact to mutually reinforce their effects. On the basis of the findings, we make some general recommendations and identify a series of action points for international partners, governments, and other stakeholders that will help ensure that investments in GHIs and country health systems can fulfil their potential to produce comprehensive and lasting results in disease-specific work, and advance the general public health agenda. The target date for achievement of the health-related Millennium Development Goals is drawing close, and the economic downturn threatens to undermine the improvements in health outcomes that have been achieved in the past few years. If adjustments to the interactions between GHIs and country health systems will improve efficiency, equity value for money, and outcomes in global public health, then these opportunities should not be missed

An assessment of interactions between global health initiatives and country health systems

Since 2000, the emergence of several large disease-specific global health initiatives (GHIs) has changed the way in which international donors provide assistance for public health. Some critics have claimed that these initiatives burden health systems that are already fragile in countries with few resources, whereas others have asserted that weak health systems prevent progress in meeting disease-specific targets. So far, most of the evidence for this debate has been provided by speculation and anecdotes. We use a review and analysis of existing data, and 15 new studies that were submitted to WHO for the purpose of writing this Report to describe the complex nature of the interplay between country health systems and GHIs. We suggest that this Report provides the most detailed compilation of published and emerging evidence so far, and provides a basis for identification of the ways in which GHIs and health systems can interact to mutually reinforce their effects. On the basis of the findings, we make some general recommendations and identify a series of action points for international partners, governments, and other stakeholders that will help ensure that investments in GHIs and country health systems can fulfil their potential to produce comprehensive and lasting results in disease-specific work, and advance the general public health agenda. The target date for achievement of the health-related Millennium Development Goals is drawing close, and the economic downturn threatens to undermine the improvements in health outcomes that have been achieved in the past few years. If adjustments to the interactions between GHIs and country health systems will improve efficiency, equity value for money, and outcomes in global public health, then these opportunities should not be missed