Introduction of New Vaccines: Decision-making Process in Bangladesh

The understanding of the decision-making process in the introduction of new vaccines helps establish why vaccines are adopted or not. It also contributes to building a sustainable demand for vaccines in a country. The purpose of the study was to map and analyze the formal decision-making process in relation to the introduction of new vaccines within the context of health policy and health systems and identify the ways of making decisions to introduce new vaccines in Bangladesh. During February-April 2011, a qualitative assessment was made at the national level to evaluate the decision-making process around the adoption of new vaccines in Bangladesh. The study population included: policy-level people, programme heads or associates, and key decision-makers of the Government, private sector, non-governmental organizations, and international agencies at the national level. In total, 13 key informants were purposively selected. Data were collected by interviewing key informants and reviewing documents. Data were analyzed thematically. The findings revealed that the actors from different sectors at the policy level were involved in the decision-making process in the introduction of new vaccines. They included policy-makers from the ministries of health and family welfare, finance, and local government and rural development; academicians; researchers; representatives from professional associations; development partners; and members of different committees on EPI. They contributed to the introduction of new vaccines in their own capacity. The burden of disease, research findings on vaccine-preventable diseases, political issues relating to outbreaks of certain diseases, initiatives of international and local stakeholders, pressure of development partners, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) support, and financial matters were the key factors in the introduction of new vaccines in Bangladesh. The slow introduction and uptake of new vaccines is a concern in the country. Rapid action on the application of GAVI support and less time taken by the Government in processing the implementation and administrative work may expedite the introduction of new vaccines in future in this country

What factors affect voluntary uptake of community-based health insurance schemes in low- and middle-income countries? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: This research article reports on factors influencing initial voluntary uptake of community-based health insurance (CBHI) schemes in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and renewal decisions. Methods: Following PRISMA protocol, we conducted a comprehensive search of academic and gray literature, including academic databases in social science, economics and medical sciences (e.g., Econlit, Global health, Medline, Proquest) and other electronic resources (e.g., Eldis and Google scholar). Search strategies were developed using the thesaurus or index terms (e.g., MeSH) specific to the databases, combined with free text terms related to CBHI or health insurance. Searches were conducted from May 2013 to November 2013 in English, French, German, and Spanish. From the initial search yield of 15,770 hits, 54 relevant studies were retained for analysis of factors influencing enrolment and renewal decisions. The quantitative synthesis (informed by meta-analysis) and the qualitative analysis (informed by thematic synthesis) were compared to gain insight for an overall synthesis of findings/statements. Results: Meta-analysis suggests that enrolments in CBHI were positively associated with household income, education and age of the household head (HHH), household size, female-headed household, married HHH and chronic illness episodes in the household. The thematic synthesis suggests the following factors as enablers for enrolment: (a) knowledge and understanding of insurance and CBHI, (b) quality of healthcare, (c) trust in scheme management. Factors found to be barriers to enrolment include: (a) inappropriate benefits package, (b) cultural beliefs, (c) affordability, (d) distance to healthcare facility, (e) lack of adequate legal and policy frameworks to support CBHI, and (f) stringent rules of some CBHI schemes. HHH education, household size and trust in the scheme management were positively associated with member renewal decisions. Other motivators were: (a) knowledge and understanding of insurance and CBHI, (b) healthcare quality, (c) trust in scheme management, and (d) receipt of an insurance payout the previous year. The barriers to renewal decisions were: (a) stringent rules of some CBHI schemes, (b) inadequate legal and policy frameworks to support CBHI and (c) inappropriate benefits package. Conclusion and Policy Implications: The demand-side factors positively affecting enrolment in CBHI include education, age, female household heads, and the socioeconomic status of households. Moreover, when individuals understand how their CBHI functions they are more likely to enroll and when people have a positive claims experience, they are more likely to renew. A higher prevalence of chronic conditions or the perception that healthcare is of good quality and nearby act as factors enhancing enrolment. The perception that services are distant or deficient leads to lower enrolments. The second insight is that trust in the scheme enables enrolment. Thirdly, clarity about the legal or policy framework acts as a factor influencing enrolments. This is significant, as it points to hitherto unpublished evidence that governments can effectively broaden their outreach to grassroots groups that are excluded from social protection by formulating supportive regulatory and policy provisions even if they cannot fund such schemes in full, by leveraging people's willingness to exercise voluntary and contributory enrolment in a community-based health insurance

A systematic review of economic evaluations of health and health-related interventions in Bangladesh

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Economic evaluation is used for effective resource allocation in health sector. Accumulated knowledge about economic evaluation of health programs in Bangladesh is not currently available. While a number of economic evaluation studies have been performed in Bangladesh, no systematic investigation of the studies has been done to our knowledge. The aim of this current study is to systematically review the published articles in peer-reviewed journals on economic evaluation of health and health-related interventions in Bangladesh.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Literature searches was carried out during November-December 2008 with a combination of key words, MeSH terms and other free text terms as suitable for the purpose. A comprehensive search strategy was developed to search Medline by the PubMed interface. The first specific interest was mapping the articles considering the areas of exploration by economic evaluation and the second interest was to scrutiny the methodological quality of studies. The methodological quality of economic evaluation of all articles has been scrutinized against the checklist developed by Evers Silvia and associates.</p> <p>Result</p> <p>Of 1784 potential articles 12 were accepted for inclusion. Ten studies described the competing alternatives clearly and only two articles stated the perspective of their articles clearly. All studies included direct cost, incurred by the providers. Only one study included the cost of community donated resources and volunteer costs. Two studies calculated the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER). Six of the studies applied some sort of sensitivity analysis. Two of the studies discussed financial affordability of expected implementers and four studies discussed the issue of generalizability for application in different context.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Very few economic evaluation studies in Bangladesh are found in different areas of health and health-related interventions, which does not provide a strong basis of knowledge in the area. The most frequently applied economic evaluation is cost-effectiveness analysis. The majority of the studies did not follow the scientific method of economic evaluation process, which consequently resulted into lack of robustness of the analyses. Capacity building on economic evaluation of health and health-related programs should be enhanced.</p

An internal health systems research portfolio assessment of a low-income country research institution

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In order to determine the type and amount of health systems research being conducted within ICDDR,B (also known as the Centre), a leading research institution in Bangladesh, an internal review of all on-going research protocols was conducted in September 2007.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A review of all ongoing research protocols within the Centre was conducted. The names of the investigators and the institutional divisions of the protocols were removed in order to decrease the amount of reviewer bias. The building blocks of the World Health Organization's "Framework for Action" on health systems was used to categorize the protocols considered to be health systems research projects. Several additional items were collected, e.g. the highest level of education completed by the Principal Investigator. A total dollar value was placed on the health systems research portfolio of the institution based on the budgets of the selected protocols.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>As of September 2007 16 out of 118 (13.5%) reviewed protocols were considered to be health systems research projects. Results of the six building blocks of the health system categorization demonstrated that a majority of these protocols involved elements of health services delivery. There was very little engagement in more downstream systems and policy research that involved leadership and governance of the health system. Eleven of the HSR studies were local in scope, while there was only one study that has a multinational focus. The Centre's total dollar value for the health systems research project portfolio added up to US$ 3,723,331.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This internal review can serve as a snap shot of on-going activities, and as a baseline for future assessments against which to monitor progress in the area of health systems research. Further, it can serve as a model for other institutions striving to assess and develop health systems research programmes and capacity.</p

Good Health at Low Cost 25 years on: lessons for the future of health systems strengthening.

In 1985, the Rockefeller Foundation published Good health at low cost to discuss why some countries or regions achieve better health and social outcomes than do others at a similar level of income and to show the role of political will and socially progressive policies. 25 years on, the Good Health at Low Cost project revisited these places but looked anew at Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kyrgyzstan, Thailand, and the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, which have all either achieved substantial improvements in health or access to services or implemented innovative health policies relative to their neighbours. A series of comparative case studies (2009-11) looked at how and why each region accomplished these changes. Attributes of success included good governance and political commitment, effective bureaucracies that preserve institutional memory and can learn from experience, and the ability to innovate and adapt to resource limitations. Furthermore, the capacity to respond to population needs and build resilience into health systems in the face of political unrest, economic crises, and natural disasters was important. Transport infrastructure, female empowerment, and education also played a part. Health systems are complex and no simple recipe exists for success. Yet in the countries and regions studied, progress has been assisted by institutional stability, with continuity of reforms despite political and economic turmoil, learning lessons from experience, seizing windows of opportunity, and ensuring sensitivity to context. These experiences show that improvements in health can still be achieved in countries with relatively few resources, though strategic investment is necessary to address new challenges such as complex chronic diseases and growing population expectations

Tackling Noncommunicable Diseases in Bangladesh: Now is the Time

This report is organized in such a way that the key policy options and strategic priorities are based on the country context, including the burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and associated risk factors and the existing capacity of the health system. Chapter one describes the country and regional contexts and the evidence of the demographic and epidemiological transitions in Bangladesh; chapter two outlines the disease burden of major NCDs, including the equity and economic impact and the common risk factors; chapter three provides an assessment of the health system and its capacity to prevent and control major NCDs; chapter four summarizes ongoing NCD interventions and activities in Bangladesh and highlights the remaining gaps and challenges; and chapter five presents key policy options and strategic priorities to prevent and control NCDs