Dataset Information

Effective cataract surgical coverage: An indicator for measuring quality-of-care in the context of Universal Health Coverage.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To define and demonstrate effective cataract surgical coverage (eCSC), a candidate UHC indicator that combines a coverage measure (cataract surgical coverage, CSC) with quality (post-operative visual outcome).

Methods

All Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) surveys with datasets on the online RAAB Repository on April 1 2016 were downloaded. The most recent study from each country was included. By country, cataract surgical outcome (CSOGood, 6/18 or better; CSOPoor, worse than 6/60), CSC (operated cataract as a proportion of operable plus operated cataract) and eCSC (operated cataract and a good outcome as a proportion of operable plus operated cataract) were calculated. The association between CSC and CSO was assessed by linear regression. Gender inequality in CSC and eCSC was calculated.

Findings

Datasets from 20 countries were included (2005-2013; 67,337 participants; 5,474 cataract surgeries). Median CSC was 53.7% (inter-quartile range[IQR] 46.1-66.6%), CSOGood was 58.9% (IQR 53.7-67.6%) and CSOPoor was 17.7% (IQR 11.3-21.1%). Coverage and quality of cataract surgery were moderately associated-every 1% CSC increase was associated with a 0.46% CSOGood increase and 0.28% CSOPoor decrease. Median eCSC was 36.7% (IQR 30.2-50.6%), approximately one-third lower than the median CSC. Women tended to fare worse than men, and gender inequality was slightly higher for eCSC (4.6% IQR 0.5-7.1%) than for CSC (median 2.3% IQR -1.5-11.6%).

Conclusion

eCSC allows monitoring of quality in conjunction with coverage of cataract surgery. In the surveys analysed, on average 36.7% of people who could benefit from cataract surgery had undergone surgery and obtained a good visual outcome.

SUBMITTER: Ramke J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5382971 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStandard indicators of quality of care have been developed in the United States. Limited information exists about quality of care in countries with universal health care coverage.ObjectiveTo assess the quality of preventive care and care for cardiovascular risk factors in a country with universal health care coverage.Design and participantsRetrospective cohort of a random sample of 1,002 patients aged 50-80 years followed for 2 years from all Swiss university primary care settings.Main measuresWe used indicators derived from RAND's Quality Assessment Tools. Each indicator was scored by dividing the number of episodes when recommended care was delivered by the number of times patients were eligible for indicators. Aggregate scores were calculated by taking into account the number of eligible patients for each indicator.Key resultsOverall, patients (44% women) received 69% of recommended preventive care, but rates differed by indicators. Indicators assessing annual blood pressure and weight measurements (both 95%) were more likely to be met than indicators assessing smoking cessation counseling (72%), breast (40%) and colon cancer screening (35%; all p < 0.001 for comparisons with blood pressure and weight measurements). Eighty-three percent of patients received the recommended care for cardiovascular risk factors, including >75% for hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes. However, foot examination was performed only in 50% of patients with diabetes. Prevention indicators were more likely to be met in men (72.2% vs 65.3% in women, p < 0.001) and patients <65 years (70.1% vs 68.0% in those ? 65 years, p = 0.047).ConclusionsUsing standardized tools, these adults received 69% of recommended preventive care and 83% of care for cardiovascular risk factors in Switzerland, a country with universal coverage. Prevention indicator rates were lower for women and the elderly, and for cancer screening. Our study helps pave the way for targeted quality improvement initiatives and broader assessment of health care in Continental Europe.

Project description:Monitoring universal health coverage (UHC) focuses on information on health intervention coverage and financial protection. This paper addresses monitoring intervention coverage, related to the full spectrum of UHC, including health promotion and disease prevention, treatment, rehabilitation, and palliation. A comprehensive core set of indicators most relevant to the country situation should be monitored on a regular basis as part of health progress and systems performance assessment for all countries. UHC monitoring should be embedded in a broad results framework for the country health system, but focus on indicators related to the coverage of interventions that most directly reflect the results of UHC investments and strategies in each country. A set of tracer coverage indicators can be selected, divided into two groups-promotion/prevention, and treatment/care-as illustrated in this paper. Disaggregation of the indicators by the main equity stratifiers is critical to monitor progress in all population groups. Targets need to be set in accordance with baselines, historical rate of progress, and measurement considerations. Critical measurement gaps also exist, especially for treatment indicators, covering issues such as mental health, injuries, chronic conditions, surgical interventions, rehabilitation, and palliation. Consequently, further research and proxy indicators need to be used in the interim. Ideally, indicators should include a quality of intervention dimension. For some interventions, use of a single indicator is feasible, such as management of hypertension; but in many areas additional indicators are needed to capture quality of service provision. The monitoring of UHC has significant implications for health information systems. Major data gaps will need to be filled. At a minimum, countries will need to administer regular household health surveys with biological and clinical data collection. Countries will also need to improve the production of reliable, comprehensive, and timely health facility data. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Universal health coverage (UHC) includes the dimensions of equity in access, quality services that improve health and protection against financial hardship. Cataract continues to be the leading cause of blindness globally, despite cataract surgery being an efficacious intervention. The aim of this scoping review is to map the nature, extent and global distribution of data on cataract services for UHC in terms of equity, access, quality and financial protection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The search will be constructed by an Information Specialist and undertaken in MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health databases. We will include all published non-interventional primary research studies and systematic reviews that report a quantitative assessment of access, equity, quality or financial protection of cataract surgical services for adults at the subnational, national, regional or global level from population-based surveys or routinely collected health service data since 1 January 2000 and published through to February 2020.Screening and data charting will be undertaken using Covidence systematic review software. Titles and abstracts of identified studies will be screened by two authors independently. Full-text articles of potentially relevant studies will be obtained and reviewed independently by two authors against the inclusion criteria. Any discrepancies between the authors will be resolved by discussion, and with a third author as necessary. A data charting form will be developed and piloted on three studies by three authors and amendments made as necessary. Data will be extracted by two reviewers independently and summarised narratively and using maps. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval was not sought as the scoping review will only use published and publicly accessible data. The review will be published in an open access peer-reviewed journal. A summary of the results will be developed for website posting, stakeholder meetings and inclusion in the ongoing Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health.

Project description:BackgroundCountries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have substantially improved access to family planning over the past 50 years. Many have also recently adopted explicit declarations of universal rights to health and universal health coverage (UHC) and have begun implementing UHC-oriented health financing schemes. These schemes will have important implications for the sustainability and further growth of family planning programs throughout the region.MethodsWe examined the status of contraceptive methods in major health delivery and financing schemes in 9 LAC countries. Using a set of 37 indicators on family planning coverage, family planning financing, health financing, and family planning inclusion in UHC-oriented schemes, we conducted a desk review of secondary sources, including population surveys, health financing assessments, insurance enrollment reports, and unit cost estimates, and interviewed in-country experts.Findings: Although the modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR) has continued to increase in the majority of LAC countries, substantial disparities in access for marginalized groups remain. On average, mCPR is 20% lower among indigenous women than the general population, 5% lower among uninsured women than insured, and 7% lower among the poorest women than the wealthiest. Among the poorest quintile of women, insured women had an mCPR 16.5 percentage points higher than that of uninsured women, suggesting that expansion of insurance coverage is associated with increased family planning access and use. In the high- and upper-middle-income countries we reviewed, all modern contraceptive methods are typically available through the social health insurance schemes that cover a majority of the population. However, in low- and lower-middle-income countries, despite free provision of most family planning services in public health facilities, stock-outs and implicit rationing present substantial barriers that prevent clients from accessing their preferred method or force them to pay out of pocket.ConclusionLeveraging UHC-oriented schemes to sustain and further increase family planning progress will require that governments take deliberate steps to (1) target poor and informal sector populations, (2) include family planning in benefits packages, (3) ensure sufficient financing for family planning, and (4) reduce nonfinancial barriers to access. Through these steps, countries can increase financial protection for family planning and better ensure the right to health of poor and marginalized populations.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Monitoring universal health coverage in reproductive, maternal and child health requires appropriate indicators for assessing coverage and equity. In 2008, the composite coverage index (CCI)-a weighted average of eight indicators reflecting family planning, antenatal and delivery care, immunizations and management of childhood illnesses-was proposed. In 2017, the CCI formula was revised to update the family planning and diarrhea management indicators. We explored the implications of adding new indicators to the CCI. METHODS:We analysed nationally representative surveys to investigate how addition of early breastfeeding initiation (EIBF), tetanus toxoid during pregnancy and post-natal care for babies affected CCI levels and the magnitude of wealth-related inequalities. We used Pearson's correlation coefficient to compare different formulations, and the slope index of inequalities [SII] and concentration index [CIX] to assess absolute and relative inequalities, respectively. RESULTS:47 national surveys since 2010 had data on the eight variables needed for the original and revised formulations, and on EIBF, tetanus vaccine and postnatal care, related to newborn care. The original CCI showed the highest average value (65.5%), which fell to 56.9% when all 11 indicators were included. Correlation coefficients between pairs of all formulations ranged from 0.93 to 0.99. When analysed separately, 10 indicators showed higher coverage with increasing wealth; the exception was EIBF (SII = -2.1; CIX = -0.5). Inequalities decreased when other indicators were added, especially EIBF-the SII fell from 24.8 pp. to 19.2 pp.; CIX from 7.6 to 6.1. The number of countries with data from two or more surveys since 2010 was 30 for the original and revised formulations and 15 when all the 11 indicators were included. CONCLUSIONS:Given the growing importance of newborn mortality, it would be desirable to include relevant coverage indicators in the CCI, but this would lead a reduction in data availability, and an underestimation of coverage inequalities. We propose that the 2017 version of the revised CCI should continue to be used.