Dataset Information

Strengthening national vaccine decision-making: Assessing the impact of SIVAC Initiative support on national immunisation technical advisory group (NITAG) functionality in 77 low and middle-income countries.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) are multi-disciplinary expert groups that provide policy-makers with independent, evidence-based advice on vaccination. Between 2008 and 2017, the SIVAC Initiative supported establishment and strengthening of NITAGs in low and lower-middle income countries though its impact was never assessed quantitatively. AIM:To quantitatively assess whether SIVAC support is associated with a faster rate at which NITAGs became functional based on six performance indicators. METHODS:Data from the World Health Organization/Unicef Joint Reporting Form (JRF) from 77 low and lower-middle-income countries were used to examine the time delay between the start of SIVAC support and NITAG functionality using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS:Countries receiving SIVAC support took a mean of 2.00 (95% CI 1.40-2.60) years to reported functionality compared to 2.82 (95% CI 2.05-3.59) years for countries without SIVAC support. We found evidence that SIVAC support is associated with reduced time until NITAG functionality, and this association cannot fully be explained by GDP per capita, percentage of GDP spent on healthcare, or NITAG functionality score at the start of the study period. However, quality of JRF data for the questions used to calculate NITAG functionality were poor, particularly for countries not receiving SIVAC support. CONCLUSION:SIVAC support is likely to have enabled many countries to more rapidly achieve NITAG functionality.

SUBMITTER: van Zandvoort K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6334253 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Strengthening national vaccine decision-making: Assessing the impact of SIVAC Initiative support on national immunisation technical advisory group (NITAG) functionality in 77 low and middle-income countries.

van Zandvoort Kevin K Howard Natasha N Mounier-Jack Sandra S Jit Mark M

Vaccine 20181210 3

<h4>Background</h4>National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) are multi-disciplinary expert groups that provide policy-makers with independent, evidence-based advice on vaccination. Between 2008 and 2017, the SIVAC Initiative supported establishment and strengthening of NITAGs in low and lower-middle income countries though its impact was never assessed quantitatively.<h4>Aim</h4>To quantitatively assess whether SIVAC support is associated with a faster rate at which NITAGs became ...[more]

PMID: 30545715

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Attention to evidence-informed policy has grown; however, efforts to strengthen the quality and use of evidence are not starting from a blank slate. Changes in health architectures and financing pose different considerations for investments in evidence-informed policy than in the past. We identify major trends that have shifted the environment in which health policies are made, and use the evolution and future aspirations of National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) in low- and middle-income countries to identify questions the sector must confront when determining how best to structure and strengthen evidence-informed health policy. DISCUSSION:Trends over the last two decades have resulted in a dense arena with many issue-specific groups, discrete initiatives to strengthen evidence-informed policy and increasing responsibility for subnational institutions. Many countries face a shifting resource base, which for some reduces the amount of resources for health. There is global momentum around universal health coverage, reflecting a broader systems approach, but few examples of how the vast array of stakeholders relate within it are available. NITAG aspirations reflect four interconnected themes related to their scope, their integration in national policy processes, health financing and relationships with ministries of finance, and NITAG positioning relative to other domestic and international entities, raising questions such as, What are the bounds of issue-specific groups and their relationship to allocation decision-making processes across health areas? How do technical advisory groups interface with what are inherently political processes? When are finances considered, by whom and how? What is the future of existing groups whose creation was intended to enhance national ownership but who need continued external support to function? When should new entities be created, in what form and with what mandate? CONCLUSIONS:Countries must determine who makes decisions about resources, when, using what criteria, and how to do so in a robust yet efficient way given the existing and future landscape. While answers to these questions are necessarily country specific, they are collective matters that cannot be addressed by specialised groups alone and have implications for new investments in evidence-informed policy.

Project description:BackgroundThe GAVI Alliance was created in 2000 to increase access to vaccines. More recently, GAVI has supported evidence-based health systems strengthening to overcome barriers to vaccination. Our objectives were: to explore countries' priorities for health systems strengthening; to describe published research summaries for each priority area in relation to their number, quality and relevance; and to describe the use of national data from surveys in identifying barriers to immunisation.MethodsFrom 44 health systems strengthening proposals submitted to GAVI in 2007 and 2008, we analysed the topics identified, the coverage of these topics by existing systematic reviews and the use of nation-wide surveys with vaccination data to justify the needs identified in the proposals.ResultsThirty topics were identified and grouped into three thematic areas: health workforce (10 topics); organisation and management (14); and supply, distribution and maintenance (6). We found 51 potentially relevant systematic reviews, although for the topic that appeared most frequently in the proposals ('Health information systems') no review was identified. Thematic and geographic relevance were generally categorised as "high" in 33 (65%) and 25 (49%) reviews, respectively, but few reviews were categorised as "highly relevant for policy" (7 reviews, 14%). With regard to methodological quality, 14 reviews (27%) were categorised as "high".The number of topics that were addressed by at least one high quality systematic review was: seven of the 10 topics in the 'health workforce' thematic area; six of the 14 topics in the area of 'organisation and management'; and none of the topics in the thematic area of 'supply, distribution and maintenance'. Only twelve of the 39 countries with available national surveys referred to them in their proposals.ConclusionRelevant, high quality research summaries were found for few of the topics identified by managers. Few proposals used national surveys evidence to identify barriers to vaccination. Researchers generating or adapting evidence about health systems need to be more responsive to managers' needs. Use of available evidence from local or national surveys should be strongly encouraged.

Project description:National Immunization Technical Advisory Committees (NITAGs) are tasked with the responsibility of guiding ministries of health and national immunization programmes in their policy development processes. Many NITAGs rely on evidence reviewed by the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Group of Experts(SAGE) on immunization and aim to adapt WHO's recommendations to their respective contexts. This relationship took on exceptional importance since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which NITAGs have expressed a notable struggle to craft appropriate policies on population prioritization and vaccine utilization in the face of supply constraints and complex programmatic and delivery logistics. This online survey was conducted to assess the usefulness of the SAGE guidance documents for COVID-19 vaccine policies and to examine the persisting needs and challenges facing NITAGs. Results confirmed that SAGE recommendations concerning COVID-19 vaccines are easy to access, understand, and adapt. They have been found to be comprehensive and timely under the data and time constrained circumstances confronting SAGE. The Global NITAG Network (GNN) appears to be the most popular vehicle for addressing questions among high income countries, in contrast to lower income countries who favour WHO Country or Regional Offices. NITAGs place much value on interaction with other NITAGs, which requires facilitation and could benefit from increased opportunities, especially within regions. It is further noted that some NITAGs have had to tackle issues during the pandemic not typically considered by SAGE, such as supply chain logistics and vaccine demand. Learning from the COVID-19 experience offers opportunities to strengthen NITAGs and the pandemic recovery effort through the development of more concrete procedures and consideration of more varied types of data, including implementation effectiveness and uptake data. There is also an opportunity for an increasing involvement of Country Office WHO personnel to support NITAGs, while ensuring information and evidence needs of countries are adequately reflected in SAGE deliberations.

Project description:BackgroundTo improve care for patients with chronic diseases, a recent policy initiative in Thailand focused on strengthening primary care based on the concept of Chronic Care Model (CCM). This study aimed to assess the perception of patients about the health care services after the implementation.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of 4071 patients with hypertension and/or diabetes registered with 27 primary care units and 11 hospital non-communicable diseases (NCDs) clinics in 11 provinces. The patients were interviewed using a validated questionnaire of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care. Upgraded primary care units (PCUs) were ordinary PCUs with the multi-professional team including a physician. Trained upgraded PCUs were upgraded PCUs with the training input. Structural equation modeling was used to create subscale scores for CCM and 5 A model characteristics. Mixed effect logistic models were employed to examine the association of subscales (high vs low score) of patient perception of the care quality with type of PCUs.ResultsCompared to hospital NCD clinics, ordinary PCUs were the best in the odds of receiving high score for every CCM subscale (ORs: 1.46-1.85; p < 0.05), whereas the trained upgraded PCUs were better in terms of follow-up (ORs:1.37; p < 0.05), and the upgraded PCU did not differ in all domains. According to the 5 A model subscales, patient assessment also revealed better performance of ordinary PCUs in all domains compared to hospital NCD clinics whereas upgraded PCUs and trained upgraded PCUs did so in some domains. Seeing the same doctor on repeated visits (ORs: 1.82-2.17; p < 0.05) or having phone contacts with the providers (ORs:1.53-1.99; p < 0.05) were found beneficial using CCM subscales and the 5A model subscales. However, patient assessment by both subscales did not demonstrate a statistically significant association across health insurance status.ConclusionsThe policy implementation might not satisfy the patients' perception on quality of chronic care according to the CCM and the 5A model subscale. However, the arrangement of chronic care with patients seeing the same doctors or patients having telephone contact with healthcare providers may satisfy the patients' perceived needs.

Project description:BackgroundA strong health information system (HIS) is one of the essential building blocks for a resilient health system. The Ministry of Health (MOH) of Ethiopia is working on different initiatives to strengthen the national HIS. Among these is the Capacity-Building and Mentorship Partnership (CBMP) Programme in collaboration with public universities in Ethiopia since November 2017. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes and share experiences of the country in working with universities to strengthen the national HIS.MethodsThe study employed a mixed-methods approach that included 247 health organizations (health offices and facilities) of CBMP-implementing woredas (districts) and 23 key informant interviews. The programme focused on capacity-building and mentoring facilities and woreda health offices. The status of HIS was measured using a connected woreda checklist before and after the intervention. The checklist consists of items related to HIS infrastructure, data quality and administrative use. The organizations were classified as emerging, candidate or model based on the score. The findings were triangulated with qualitative data collected through key informant interviews.ResultsThe results showed that the overall score of the HIS implementation was 46.3 before and 74.2 after implementation of the programme. The proportion of model organizations increased from 1.2% before to 31.8% after the programme implementation. The health system-university partnership has provided an opportunity for higher education institutions to understand the health system and tune their curricula to address real-world challenges. The partnership brought opportunities to conduct and produce local- and national-level evidence to improve the HIS. Weak ownership, poor responsiveness and poor perceptions of the programme were mentioned as major challenges in programme implementation.ConclusionThe overall HIS has shown substantial progress in CBMP implementation woredas. A number of facilities became models in a short period of time after the implementation of the programme. The health system-university partnership was found to be a promising approach to improve the national HIS and to share the on-the-ground experiences with the university academicians. However, weak ownership and poor responsiveness to feedback were the major challenges identified as needing more attention in future programme implementation.

Dataset Information

Strengthening national vaccine decision-making: Assessing the impact of SIVAC Initiative support on national immunisation technical advisory group (NITAG) functionality in 77 low and middle-income countries.

Publications

Strengthening national vaccine decision-making: Assessing the impact of SIVAC Initiative support on national immunisation technical advisory group (NITAG) functionality in 77 low and middle-income countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets