Equity in Investments – a Need to Map the Research Landscape for Health

More information should be made available in equity terms to the global health community about how money invested in research for health is collectively spent and how much benefit emerges from the research itself

By  Michael Head 

Senior Research Fellow

Clinical Informatics Research Unit and Global Health Research Institute

Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, UK

Equity in Investments – a Need to Map the Research Landscape for Health

 

Billions of dollars are invested in health research every year, but we (the global health community) have very little idea in how that money is collectively spent and how much benefit emerges from the research.

It is, of course, important to have that data and a viewpoint on the research landscape. Knowledge of what has been funded will show the strengths within a portfolio, show where the skillsets and infrastructure lie, and where the collaborations are taking place. A description of the research landscape will also, importantly, show what hasn’t been funded. Where are the evidence gaps, and why? Is research not feasible in that setting? Does the technology not quite come up to scratch yet, but might do in five years’ time? Has no one really considered that question before and thus a key burden of disease been forgotten somewhat?

To provide some examples – in 2018 and via the Research Investments in Global Health study (ResIn), I co-authored a report covering $3 billion of pneumonia research funding across 2000-2015, awarded by funders in the G20 and EU nations.1 We showed how in sub-Saharan Africa, The Gambia was the country receiving the greatest focus for research related to pneumonia, whilst countries such as Chad and Central African Republic were involved in virtually no pneumonia research over the 16 year time-period of our dataset. However, there is certainly plenty of pneumonia in both countries.

Similarly, in 2017, we published an article in The Lancet Global Health that looked at malaria funding for both research, and for malaria control, across sub-Saharan Africa.2 Here, for both types of financing, countries across west and east Africa were clearly global health hubs and recipient of greater amounts of investment (for example, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya), but Chad and Central African Republic were again lacking in being the focus of funding, despite these nations having a large burden of malaria-related disease.

Clearly, these two countries are very difficult to invest in. They have significant political and socio-economic difficulties, and little infrastructure or experience to do large-scale research. The answer cannot be to simply throw money at the problem. Investments must be smart, targeted, carefully thought out. I often finish my presentations with the phrase “We must invest wisely”. Our data can provide some answers in terms of quantifying the landscape and highlighting research strengths, and evidence and investment gaps. This data can then lead to conversations across a range of global health stakeholders about findings solutions (for example, small-scale in-country capacity building, or encouraging partnerships between universities in resource-poor settings with institutions in the global north). When considering the distribution of limited resources, in this case focusing on money, equity is important and we need better data to more fully consider the problem and apply solutions.

Through ResIn, we are currently working through an analysis of all infectious disease research 2000-2017. This will cover around 80 000 separate awards covering approximately $100 billion of research funding. We are likely to publish our findings in 2019, and believe that the dataset and results will be a useful resource for funders, policymakers and researchers across the globe.

 

Author

Dr Michael Head is a Senior Research Fellow based in the Clinical Informatics Research Unit and Global Health Research Institute at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, UK. He co-founded the ResIn (Research Investments in Global Health) study and has led the development of research investment analyses, presenting the study findings at WHO headquarters in Geneva, Wellcome Trust in London, and to European Commission colleagues in Brussels. He also has an interest in scabies research, and vaccines and the activity of anti-vaccination activists.

Funders

The pneumonia study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the malaria project was funded by the Royal Society for Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.

 

References

1            Rebecca J Brown, Michael G Head. Sizing Up Pneumonia Investment. Southampton, 2018 DOI:https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.6143060.v1.

2            Head MG, Goss S, Gelister Y, et al. Global funding trends for malaria research in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Heal 2017; published online June. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5567191/.

 

Health Breaking News 309

Health Breaking News Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Health Breaking News 309

 

What the 2018 Midterm Elections Means for Health Care 

What the Mid Term Election Results Mean for the United Nations  

Are there too many global health meetings, summits & declarations? 

Human Rights Reader 465 

How to Ensure That Women and Girls Count in Government Budgets 

A healthy future needs good impact assessments, today 

‘Why Health in All Policies Is a Necessity?’ by Gisela Abbam 

UK aid supports global efforts to tackle preventable maternal and newborn deaths 

Developing mobile health applications for neglected tropical disease research 

Digital Health and Health Systems of the Future 

The Role of Digital Strategies in Financing Health Care for Universal Health Coverage in Low- and Middle-Income Countries 

DRC Ebola: Latest numbers as of 6 November 2018  

African Countries Intensify Vigilance on Ebola 

Uganda Vaccinates Front-line health-workers against Ebola 

Ebola vaccine technology could speed up development of other vaccines 

The U.S. Government and Global Polio Efforts 

Old drains and dirty water: Zimbabwe’s chronic cholera crisis 

Health systems thinking: A new generation of research to improve healthcare quality 

Involuntary mental health treatment in the era of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 

WHO Guidelines: Management of physical health conditions in adults with severe mental disorders 

Lobbyism, health and the European Parliament – starting a conversation about corporate conflicts of interest 

WTO TRIPS Council: South Africa asks WTO members to share best practices to address excessive prices 

Report Finds “Overpatenting”, Overpricing Of Top Diabetes Drug In US 

A life-saving gene drug could hold families hostage with a $4 million price tag 

‘The Contradictory Case of EU SPC Mechanism and Waiver’ by Daniele Dionisio 

Should A Drug’s Value Depend On The Disease Or Population It Treats? Insights From ICER’s Value Assessments 

How air pollution is destroying our health 

Children at Risk: Why a Corporate Funder Is Taking on Climate Change 

Conflict at the Root of Food Insecurity in Africa  

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSE ‘Engaging Evidence and Policy for Social Change’ From 15 January 2019 9:00 until 17 January 2019 17:00 

Why Health in All Policies Is a Necessity?

It cannot be overemphasised that improving the health of the population will not be achieved without a whole-system approach to health. Integrated healthcare delivery and health system strengthening are evidence-based approaches that have improved population health in varying degrees.  They enable sustainability and identify other factors that impinge on the improvement of health outcomes

 By Gisela Abbam MBA

Director, Strategic Partnerships

Abt Associates

Why Health in All Policies Is a Necessity?

 

One may ask, what do I mean by “health-in-all policies,” and why is it necessary?

Health in All Policies is an approach to public policies across sectors that systematically takes into account the health implications of decisions, seeks synergies, and avoids harmful health impacts, in order to improve population health and health equity”.

If we agree that human beings are the most important asset in any country and that investment in human resources improves productivity, then achieving good health for a population is a necessity.  For years it has been stated by many health professionals that health needs to be seen as an investment rather than a cost; but the challenge is determining the return on investment. For investing in health emphasises the need for investment in prevention and early diagnosis, the benefits of which are realised in the longer term.  Having health in all policies supports and promotes the health and well-being of the individual.  Perhaps more importantly, it further enables a cross-sectoral approach to addressing factors that can affect health, such as lack of housing, electricity, food security and poverty.  Other key factors include air pollution, which has an impact on health.

Mental health issues impose an enormous disease burden on societies across the world. Depression alone affects 350 million people globally and is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Half of all mental illness begins by the age of 14, but most cases go undetected and untreated.

Every sector, be it energy, housing or agriculture need human resources to operate and deliver results.  Ensuring that people are healthy and fit for work requires prevention, early diagnosis and treatment of diseases and conditions as well as a functional and effective primary care system.  Increasingly, children and youth are developing health issues, and healthy ageing is becoming a challenge.  These require interventions through schools and local communities.

There is now globally a long list of health issues that can affect population health.  These range from global health security to communicable and non-communicable diseases, which includes mental health, neglected tropical diseases and the list goes on………

The point is, tackling health issues needs be done in its broadest sense to address population health. This requires all sectors working together to achieve this. It cannot be overemphasised that improving the health of the population will not be achieved without a whole-system approach to health. Integrated healthcare delivery and health system strengthening are evidence-based approaches that have improved population health in varying degrees.  They enable sustainability and identify other factors that impinge on the improvement of health outcomes.

The benefits of health in all policies include enabling a healthier and more productive population; earlier diagnosis and treatment which may reduce premature deaths; and increased public awareness of health and health promotion.

The World Bank’s new Human Capital Index has for the first time determined that investment in health and education are key factors behind the economic growth and poverty reduction rates in several countries in the world.

The rankings, based on health, education and survivability measures, assessed the future productivity and earnings potential for citizens of 157 of the World Bank’s member nations, and ultimately those countries’ potential economic growth. It found that on average 56 percent of children born today will forego more than half their potential lifetime earnings because governments were not investing adequately to ensure their people are healthy, educated and ready for an evolving workplace. One solution is to institute health in all policies, so all national initiatives include a pre-health impact assessment.

In 1969, Finland had the second highest cardiovascular mortality in the world — 643 of 100,000 men aged 35 to 64 annually.  The numbers were so striking, so high compared to the rest of the world, that the public health authorities couldn’t help but take note. Finland’s death rates from coronary heart disease were two or even three times those of other European countries and Japan.  Today, the rate is one tenth of that.

Health monitoring, reducing smoking and improving dietary habits have had a huge impact on their non-communicable disease burden.  The Finnish educational system provides health education, physical activity and free healthy school meals.  Six years ago, one in every five-year-old children was overweight, but through health interventions in schools, the proportion of five-year-olds who are overweight has been halved. The agricultural sector promotes the production of healthier foods, and the Ministry of Finance carries excise duties on soft  drinks, alcohol and tobacco. The implementation of health in all policies has produced good results for Finland.

Developing an implementation plan for increasing access to healthcare for the population involves prevention and health promotion initiatives, which cannot be achieved by the ministries of health alone.  In conclusion, I reiterate that ensuring health in all policies, and successfully implementing the policies, will contribute to the economic advancement of any given country.

 

Reference links

http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/188809/Health-in-All-Policies-final.pdf

http://www.worldbank.org/en/events/2016/03/09/out-of-the-shadows-making-mental-health-a-global-priority

http://www.who.int/mental_health/en/

http://www.abtassociates.com/node/13677

http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital

http://www.who.int/features/2015/finland-health-in-all-policies/en/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Contradictory Case of EU SPC Mechanism and Waiver

This article turns the spotlight on concerns that undue pressures on the European Council are undermining progress on a workable SPC (supplementary protection certificate) waiver legislation for medicinal products  in an attempt to limit competition and give non-EU pharmaceutical companies strong advantage over EU-based generic and biosimilar manufacturers

By  Daniele Dionisio

PEAH – Policies for Equitable Access to Health

The Contradictory Case of EU SPC Mechanism and Waiver

 

The European Union (EU) Regulation EC 469/2009 concerning the  supplementary protection certificate (SPC) mechanism for medicinal products allows pharmaceutical manufacturers to extend the twenty-year patent protection on their medicines by an additional five years.

SPC introduction was justified in order to ‘meet the innovative pharmaceutical concern that they were no longer given a fair opportunity to recover their Research and Development efforts and investments’ , while taking into account thatthe period that elapses between the filing of an application for a patent for a new medicinal product and authorization to place the medicinal product on the market makes the period of effective protection under the patent insufficient to cover the investment put into the research’.

On the downside, SPCs unfortunately serve as a monopoly strategy whereby once a pharmaceutical company has patented minor changes with no added therapeutic benefit (the so called ever-greening mechanism) to an existing medicine, the same company will expectedly apply for an SPC on those minor changes, so expanding its unfettered control on the market, while getting rid of the risk of generic competition.

Relevantly, SPC terms make it clear that, while EU-based manufacturers of generic or biosimilar medicines are not allowed to produce generic or biosimilar versions of these drugs for sale in the EU during that time, they are also not allowed to export these medicines to nations where the SPC is not in force, nor can they manufacture and store up medicines for the EU market before the day of SPC expiry.

So compounded, such an extended monopoly protection has undermined access to affordable generic drugs and biosimilars in Europe and lead to spiralling prices for lifesaving medicines , while exhausting the national budgets and barring patients from non-discriminatory access to treatments.

This is without prejudice to the fact that SPC rules do not apply to non-EU manufacturers. As said…a biosimilar or generic manufacturer in Russia, India, the US, Canada or China can, for example, produce medicines in advance of day-1 of the EU SPC expiry. This gives them a considerable advantage on EU manufacturers…’.

All things considered, no wonder in September 2017 thirty-three civil society organisations recommended the European Commission (EC) to abolish the SPC mechanism or, at least, strongly improve its transparency and equity,  in alignment with the Report of UN High Level Panel on Access to Medicines.

Under these circumstances and a previous request by the EU Council, the EC engaged in reviewing the Regulation EC 469/2009, and a proposal for a minimal SPC manufacturing waiver was released earlier this year. The current proposal would not allow EU-based manufacturers to prepare for Day 1 Launch in advance of SPC expiry in the EU, but only for export to non-EU countries where the SPC does not apply.

In the face of this, Medicines for Europe, on behalf of the EU’s generic and biosimilar medicines manufacturers, just called for a more comprehensive waiver including an immediate applicability to existing SPCS and a Day-1 Launch provision to let generic and biosimilar companies produce in the EU and roll-out in the EU market with no delay after the SPC expiry, so overcoming the long lead-in times needed to manufacture medicines.

Reportedly, this waiver, if comprehensively and correctly applied,  ‘…should generate huge opportunities for Europe, with 25,000 additional jobs, savings in the European healthcare system of € 3.1 billion and additional net sales for the EU pharmaceutical industry’.

Disappointingly, vested interests look like they  would run contrary to these opportunities currently under discussion by the EC and the Council. Word is spreading, indeed, that undue pressures on the European Council are undermining progress on a workable SPC waiver legislation aligning with the minimal EC proposal above (let alone a broad-minded, comprehensive one), in an attempt to limit competition and give non-EU companies strong advantage over EU-based generic and biosimilar manufacturers.

No doubt, concerns also apply to the purposes of a closed-door meeting held in Brussels on 23 October by the US Patent and Trademark Office, the US Trade Representative and the US Department of Commerce with EU government officials purportedlyto convey the position of the US commercial bodies and representatives to EU officials on the introduction of an SPC manufacturing waiver in Europe’.

All things taken together, how do the circumstances highlighted so far attune with EU interest in backing jobs, economic savings and additional sales for the EU pharmaceutical industry, while not disregarding the European Council’s recognition (17 June 2016 paragraph 19) of ‘the importance of timely availability of generics and biosimilars in order to facilitate patients’ access to pharmaceutical therapies and to improve the sustainability of national health systems’?

 

 

Health Breaking News 308

Health Breaking News Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Health Breaking News 308

 

What’s at stake as EU, Africa, Caribbean, Pacific, negotiate new accord 

Opinion: New name but same mistakes in Compact With Africa 

Is the TPP worth it? 

Towards Health Sustainability in Europe – a public health narrative for a multilevel & multisectoral approach  

UAEM: In ‘Historic” Shift, Universities In Canada Adopt Licensing Promoting Access To Medicines 

New Report: Mitigating Patent Linkage To Promote Medicines Access In LMICs 

EPHA 2018 Universal Access and Affordable Medicines Forum Brussels 20 November 2018 

Seminar on access to quality-assured medicines Brussels 20 November 2018 

Should we respect patents or people? 

The ITM symposium on 40 years PHC: is there a doctor in the house? 

US Releases New Medicare Drug Plan To “Pay The Prices Other Countries Pay” 

Symposium [Human] Resources, Research, Rights: Ethical dilemmas in Global Health Amsterdam 9th November 2018 

Does supportive supervision enhance community health worker motivation? A mixed-methods study in four African countries 

1a Convention del Management della Sanità Italiana Roma 7-9 novembre 2018 

Hunger stalks Asia’s booming cities – U.N. agencies 

Ebola DRC: Latest numbers as of 1 November 2018 

Cholera Threatens a Comeback Worldwide  

Rapid shift from global to national purchase of TB drugs increases risk of stockouts and use of drugs of unknown quality 

5-year-plan to bring HIV vaccine to market 

During A Flu Epidemic, Dispensing Flu Vaccines at Pharmacies Could Save Lives and Costs 

Yes, China’s Lending Is a Problem for Debt-Vulnerable Countries 

Local Angle: A Community Foundation Making a Big Push for Health Equity in a Small State 

Human Rights Reader 464 

COMUNICATO STAMPA: IL DECRETO IMMIGRAZIONE E LE IMPLICAZIONI PER LA SALUTE 

The Advisory Board to the Emergency Support Fund for Key Populations Starts to Function 

The 1st global WHO conference on Air Pollution and Health in Geneva 

Gas companies face Californian wipe-out, say S&P, Moody’s 

Highlights: An energy industry view on moving toward a lower carbon future 

Towards higher CO2 limits to protect the climate and our health 

Banning cars in major cities would rapidly improve millions of lives 

Health Breaking News 307

Health Breaking News Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Health Breaking News 307

 

New global commitment to primary health care for all at Astana conference 

WHO: Primary Health Care (PHC) 

Declaration of Alma-Ata International Conference on Primary Health Care, Alma-Ata, USSR, 6-12 September 1978 

HH Pope Francis and WHO Director-General: Health is a right and not a privilege 

Global Conference on Primary Health Care 25-26 October 2018 Astana, Kazakhstan: LIVE 

Renewing commitment to Primary Health Care – the key role for research to accelerate Universal Health Coverage through Primary Health Care 

The TDR Gateway: a new way to publish the science of solutions. Launch date: 19 November 2018 

Building a movement for health – a tool for (health) activists 

Building a movement for Health  

G77+China Plan To Take UN TB Declaration Forward: Increased Resources, Access To Medicines 

Medical Crowdfunding’s Dark Side

Activists interrupt TB conference opening ceremony to call on J&J to cut price of TB drug in half, to one dollar per day 

Activits urge national TB programs and treatment providers to discontinue use of harmful injectable agents in TB treatment 

Activists call on countries and donors to immediately scale up use of life-saving TB LAM test 

Talking HIV: Telling people about your HIV status 

Near-Monopolies On HCV Diagnostics Curb Competition, Keep Prices High, Research Finds 

Polio experts ‘owe it to the children of the world’ to wipe out the disease 

Cholera returns to Yemen, with powerful allies  

US Interference In EU SPC Manufacturing Waiver “Unacceptable,” Says EU Generic Industry Group  

What’s needed to do a better job of pre-empting disease outbreaks 

Nutrition gets a moment at the World Food Prize as global hunger rises 

World hunger has risen for three straight years, and climate change is a cause 

What staying cool has to do with eradicating poverty in India 

Pregnant women in Nigeria are shunning medical centers. Here’s why. 

‘Discrimination and Stereotype in the Global-North and -South Nation-States: the Major Interlope to Universal Health Coverage for Refugees and Other Vulnerable Immigrant Persons’ by Michael Ssemakula 

Africa Near the Bottom of World Bank’s New Human Capital Index 

Integrate regionally for stronger, sustainable growth in resource-rich sub-Saharan Africa 

Climate litigations set to rise globally on back of IPCC report 

Climate science gets precise enough for legal action 

Discrimination and Stereotype in the Global-North and -South Nation-States

This paper explores the gaps in access to health for refugees and other migrant vulnerable individuals due to the discrimination and stereotypes in the host countries. A refugee is somebody forced to flee his home country with a strong justifiable fright of being oppressed and victimized on basis of ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, nationality and a member of a specific societal assemblage or political ideology 

 By Michael Ssemakula

Health Rights Researcher & Advocate

Human Rights Research Documentation Center (HURIC) & PHM-Network, Uganda

Discrimination and Stereotype in the Global-North and -South  Nation-States

The Major Interlope to Universal Health Coverage for Refugees and Other Vulnerable Immigrant Persons

 

The exponential paranormal jump-pace at which the present-day refugee crisis is exacerbating the back-and-forth unparalleled international migration, is acutely awe-inspiring and becoming a chief post-colonial era humanitarian integral complex anthem. This is intensely overshadowing the contemporary global and continental states managers’ comprehensive policy and plan frameworks on population planning. This has been allied with weighty-unrelenting challenges to get appropriate human rights-centric approaches to refugee discrimination, stigmatization and other dehumanizing human rights abuses against their dignity from dogmatic chauvinistic and xenophobic prejudist evacuee-host republics. Legions-upon-legions of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants arrived in the European Union state members in 2015. The sporadically skewed growing influx of susceptible populaces postures voluminous challenges to the host-foreign-fatherlands in the wave-length of preparedness and pliability of health systems and access to vital primary and emergency health care services.

This paper explores the gaps in access to health for refugees and other migrant vulnerable individuals due to the discrimination and stereotypes in the host countries. A refugee is somebody forced to flee his home country with a strong justifiable fright of being oppressed and victimized on basis of ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, nationality and a member of a specific societal assemblage or political ideology. Here the refugee is assumed to be outside the country of his nationality, and due to fear, he is unwilling to avail himself to the jurisprudence protection of his State.

In regards to the report on ‘Refugees: towards better access to health-care services’ (Etienne V Langlois, 2016), the migration crisis is one of the most pressing global challenges, as worldwide displacement is now at the highest level ever recorded. Latest global estimates by the United Nations Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) show that 59.5 million people are forcibly displaced as a result of persecution, conflict, generalized violence, or human rights violations. The estimated refugee population reached an unprecedented 19.6 million individuals worldwide in 2015 – half of them being children and the number is steadily increasing, with Syria, Afghanistan and South Sudan as the leading countries of origin of refugees. A lengthy drought preceded the Syrian crisis that led to an enormous movement of people into cities and contributed to instability. Moreover, in South Sudan, due to the continued power hunger and political divide through coup d’état attempt accusations from President Salva Kiir against his former deputy Riek Machar, South Sudanese Civil War’s existence has been eminent between the government forces and the opposition forces which has claimed lives of over 300,000 people with over 2.1 million of those internally displaced, and over 1.5 million having fled to neighboring countries, especially to Kenya, Sudan, and Uganda, according to UNHCR  (UNHCR, 2018) and World Vision reports on countries with the highest number of refugees (Vision, 2018). Furthermore, reports show Uganda was implicated in exiling hundreds of LGBTI populace to Kenya after passing the harsh Anti-homosexuality Bill in 2014, which made Kenya a safe haven for this key population till many were settled in Europe and North-America as asylum seekers to save their lives from inhumane and homophobic moralists’ persecution in Uganda.

Refugees experience conditions of societal exclusion and dementing stereotypes due to their feeble perceived status by society thus facing ostracism, vulnerability, marginalization, poverty, stigmatization and humiliation which heightens discrimination and heavy trauma of displacement (thereby extremely affecting their psychological health and emotion intelligence, including women, children, and older people). Research shows refugees frequently have severe psychological health complications and trauma symptoms, especially depression due to the status labelled on them, immense deportation fear and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), related to prearranged violence, torture, human rights defilement, relocation, brutal torture, traumatic migration experience and other forms of violence. As such, refugees  experience a range of bodily problems and disabilities, including malunited fractures, soft tissue wounds, neuropathies, head injuries, and epilepsy. Refugees also suffer from a heavyweight burden of undernourishment and anemia, curable Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) intensified by inadequate access to regular medication, and transmittable diseases. Right to free health care for refugees is typically constrained in host states with overwhelming divergence in entitlements between refugees or migrants and the host nation-citizenry which encumbers the refugees access to health care. Literally asylees are granted delimited health care accessibility, habitually with partial access to emergency medical care, pregnancy, childbearing, and vaccination services. The ostracization from health care is worsened by the illegal status of many undocumented refugees, information barrier and awareness about the obtainability of host country’s medical services due to insufficient provision of language translation services, limited transport access, traditionally insensitive care and financial constraints to access social security services such as  insurance services.

Overall, these circumstances do represent a hindrance to a full-bodied approach to elevation of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) to refugees and other migrant vulnerable persons. Therefore, in a bid to stimulate UHC and promote the right to the highest attainable standards of health for all individuals (as enshrined in the article #12, of the International Covenant on Social Economic and Cultural Rights-ICSECR), some remedies are proposed in this article to narrow the gap in access to health for the refugees and other susceptible migrant persons:

-Strengthening regional unification of registration and anti-discrimination policies to dismantle health exclusion. In the long-run, this should become a robust appropriate measure to benchmark the success level of the drive to promote access to health for refugees, and trim down health service unreachability and bureaucratic propensities involved in documentation of refugees to ease their legal recognition and access to the host country’s health care services.

-Strong re-echoing of pre-onset orientation. Programmes that encompass effective and holistic pre-departure training for refugees should be redesigned to enlighten the refugees on the destination journeys they are yet to take; this should be backed by basic host country linguistic training with the help of language translators to streamline and abridge service accessibility.

-Reinforcing and widening social security coverage for all. This would include broadening of the insurance options, whereby newly inclusive well-streamlined insurance options support refugees and other vulnerable persons such as asylees and undocumented immigrants access to health care. This can be attained through resilient regional integrated states funded comprehensive health insurance frameworks through low-fee insurance plans with minimal stringent administrative procedures. Many insurance stratagems have often commended vulnerable immigrants to financially pay to some level in order to access health care related services. Unfortunately, that can’t be feasible to such vulnerable society stratas unless supported by the countries in region blocs as suggested above.

-Strengthening service providers training and preparation. Providers themselves need a further holistic capacity training to properly care for the refugees especially in regards to counseling and trauma management. The center of focus should be pointed towards cultural proficiency to better existing services as well as inventing new services. Some providers insufficiently understand the current policies on health care access and might turn refugees and other immigrants away based on false information. Henceforth, there’s a need for an additional training to keep providers upbeat to the legislation dynamics related to health access.

In conclusion, several barriers across-the-board that impede the drive to promote health care for refugees and other vulnerable immigrants are still eminent. These barriers are not only administrative and legal in nature but correspondingly incorporate challenges that inherently involve discrimination and stereotype due to the bigotry perceived status of the refugees. Barriers are worsened by exclusion and segregation health policies against non-citizenry strata in host countries as a result of the inadequate social and financial assets.

 

References

Etienne V Langlois, A. H. (2016). Refugees: towards better access to health-care services. London: The lancet.

UNHCR. (2018). FORCED DISPLACEMENT IN 2017. Geneva: UNHCR.

Vision, W. (2018, June 26). Forced to flee: Top countries refugees are coming from. Retrieved from World Vision: https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories/forced-to-flee-top-countries-refugees-coming-from

 

 

Health Breaking News 306

Health Breaking News Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Health Breaking News 306

 

PHM: Alternative Civil Society Astana Declaration on Primary Health Care 

Global Conference on Primary Health Care in Astana, Kazakhstan, October 25-26, 2018 

PHM: Building a Movement for Health 

‘Private Players in the Growth Paradox of Health Service Provision and Advancement in Uganda’ by Michael Ssemakula 

“The People’s Prescription”: New Report Calls For Value Creation Instead Of Value Extraction In Pharmaceutical R&D 

Antimicrobial Resistance At The World Investment Forum: UNCTAD, WHO Join Forces 

Presentation of GARDP by Dr Manica Balasegaram, Executive Director 

Register for REVIVE/GARDP upcoming webinars on antimicrobial drug development and catch-up on those you may have missed 

Towards national systems for continuous surveillance of antimicrobial resistance: Lessons from tuberculosis 

Trump administration and Big Pharma square off over proposal to televise drug prices 

Research Group Identifies Over-Patenting Of Pharmaceuticals In India, Calls For Patent Reform 

DNDi E-news October 2018 

Statement on the October 2018 meeting of the IHR Emergency Committee on the Ebola virus disease outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo 

Ebola DRC latest numbers as of 16 October 2018 

The danger is clear in DRC Ebola outbreak 

Zambia on alert to quash future Ebola cases 

Ebola experts pulled from Congo amid ongoing outbreak 

Polio eradication target at risk as new cases recorded in Africa 

To eliminate TB we need imagination and ambition 

Cooks among TB-free nations 

A new public-private partnership drug stirs hope to curb maternal mortality 

The Drive To Quality And Access In Rural Health 

Farm and food policy innovations for the digital age 

World Food Day 2018: The elusive quest to end hunger  

Malnutrition is a staggering global burden – we must give new meaning to the food we eat 

True Cost of a Plate of Food Around the World 

Housing First: A Funder Boosts a Promising Model to Address Homelessness in Hawaii 

Reducing inequality: what is your country doing to tackle the gap between rich and poor? 

That Dire New Climate Report is a Call to Action for Every Funder. Here’s What Needs to Happen 

EU, Canada Officials Review CETA Performance, Endorse Recommendations on Climate and Gender 

Bill Gates launches EU clean energy ‘breakthrough’ fund in Brussels 

Private Players in the Growth Paradox of Health Service Provision and Advancement in Uganda

This paper focuses on the role of private actors in the direct provision of health care in Uganda, through provision of health related goods and services such as research, treatments, human resources, and healthcare financing. It maintains that, while the health sector system of Uganda is predominantly covered by the private health care in its current state, this has mostly benefited the rich and middle class citizenry with higher disposable incomes who can afford the high charges on treatment. The paper also stresses that much as the private profit motivated forces hike fees on health care, this can also be worsened and perpetuated by the public entities

 By Michael Ssemakula

Health Rights Researcher & Advocate

Human Rights Research Documentation Center (HURIC) & PHM-Network, Uganda

 Private Players in the Growth Paradox of Health Service Provision and Advancement in Uganda

 

 

When the people hear the datum of private health provision through pure private or public private synergies, they contextualize it as a neoliberal monetized service from the industrial medical complex phenomena of laissez-faire and capitalistic forces of economic systems.

This paper focuses on the role of private actors in the direct provision of health care, through provision of health related goods and services such as research, treatments, human resources, and healthcare financing.

Private sector’s engagement in the delivery of health care encircles a complex variety of activities done by non-governmental actors. These include national, multinational corporations, non-governmental organizations, private institutions including charitable bodies, and other non- and for-profit entities, and private individuals, such as general practitioners, professionals and consultants. Their professional undertakings in health are indispensable which include direct delivery of health care, advisory services, the management of health facilities, manufacturing and supply of healthcare merchandises such as pharmaceutical products, medicines and rehabilitation services like psychiatric services, and the financing of health care products and services. These roles and activities may also be carried out within a publicly managed and funded health care systems, though countries have embraced the use of Private Public Partnerships (PPP) to guarantee availability, accessibility and aquireability of quality health services.

It is significant to recognize and address private actors’ participation and contribution to the health sector vis-à-vis the global goal of achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) to strike a balance in division of roles performed by the two sectors. Government health entities are famously known for provision of mainly essential healthcare services, while their private counterparts providing health insurance services, highly specialized and expensive research services.

Case-in-line, the Production Possibility Frontier (PPF) health financing curves, of different countries especially in the Low Income Countries (LIC) show most of the times governments of these countries trade off research for Primary Health Care (PHC) due to the scarcity of health financing resources. According to the research by Melvin (2005), this indicates that more resources are earmarked and devoted towards PHC and other diseases treatment than health research and health insurance services on the PPF health financing curves during resource earmarking and appropriation. With such under-provision of resources to support significant health research, innovations and inventions, a void is left to be filled by the private players. For example, in Uganda research is mainly done by the private firms or charity foundations. In the recent past, research on an epidemic neglected tropical disease, the Nodding syndrome, in Uganda was funded by the Canada-based Raymond Chang Foundation. Nodding syndrome has killed and distressed lives of countless children in northern Uganda for a significant number of years (Kakumirizi, 2018). The government did not have the capacity to finance this hardcore research exercise, though it was in position to afford the air tickets of the seven Ugandan scientists who were sent to partake in this important science study in Canada.

Besides the research, in Uganda the health insurance policies are mainly provided by the private sector. The government mainly uses social security schemes for its populaces like employment old compensation scheme of the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) for  retired workers in private sector, and pensions and gratuities for the retired workers in public sector. However, those who are self-employed especially those in informal sector are out of this equation catered for by the government. The government has not yet considered the national health insurance scheme because it is considered to be expensive to the vast majority of the people and the government itself in terms of periodical premiums to be paid.

The outlook of the health sector in Uganda has been directed by the forces of price mechanism through the private health service providers due to the high degree of inelastic demand for the availability and accessibility of good quality health-related services. When Uganda embraced the divestiture and liberalization drive through the economic reform program of 1987 after the civil war, the majority of sectors’ operations and management systems were restructured and rationalized with the health sector inclusive. The landscape of the health sector system of Uganda changed to a mixed public and private service delivery system though it is predominantly covered by the private health care in its current state (Centre, 2015). Health in Uganda has slightly experienced a blighter note improvement through provision of better quality health care.

However, this has mostly benefited the rich and middle class citizenry with higher disposable incomes who can afford the high charges on treatment. Both the public and private sector in health now fall in the same equation of premiums charged on patients: example-in-view, when the Uganda government on September 13th, 2018 completed the construction of Mulago Specialized Women and Neonatal Hospital (MSWNH) in Kampala which started on June 9th, 2015 by the Arab contractors Osman Ahmed Osman and Company funded through a loan the government of Uganda obtained from the Islamic Development Bank. This was one of the paths to improve reproductive and maternal health, decongest Mulago National Referral Hospital and enhance treatment of women with difficult reproductive health complications to reduce referrals abroad for certain specialized treatment in reproductive and neonatal health category. Unfortunately, upon the completion of the facility, the Ministry of Health came up with a list of unaffordable fees on services that this new facility was to offer. This has become an impossible dream to many vulnerable women in Uganda to access this facility and resort to cheaper and affordable private health facilities that can offer good maternal health services according to reports (Salim, 2018).

This shows that much as the private profit motivated forces hike fees on health care, this can also be worsened and perpetuated by the public entities. Therefore in order to improve health care accessibility for all in both private and public sectors without exposing the citizenry to detestable financial hardships, proper health governance should be put into consideration through placing the niche on the following:

Reinforcing the work of the advisory boards, According to, the Public Health Act, 281, provides for the establishment of advisory board and states “For the purpose of this Act, the Minister shall establish a body to be known as the Advisory Board of Health comprising the chief medical officer, or his or her authorized representative, as chairperson and such other members as the Minister may see fit to appoint, including at least three non-officials resident in Uganda who shall be appointed for such period as the Minister may determine.” Regulating the private sector in health protects the citizenry against exploitation from the private individuals through price mechanism system. When their work is properly guided and operation boundary is well demarcated, more positive social outcomes towards health are realized. Therefore the line should be drawn between what the private and public sector should provide, such that essential health services especially in the Primary Health Care are not left solely for the private sector.

Rebuilding the policy space, capacities and systems that support equitable health access for all. The health and wellbeing of the citizenry is mainly dependent on the policies and systems in place and the capacities they have to sustainably maintain the health of nationals. Health as a natural fundamental right and principle, should not be capitulated fully to private sector to insure. It’s the mandate of the governments to shoulder the lead role in health promotion before the capitalist drivers, to guarantee equitable health access and a healthy populace. This affirms the hypothesis that higher productivity, efficiency and creation of a country’s wealth is dependent on its Human Development Index (HDI) through equal accessibility to good health, good education and good standard of living for the population, which is achieved through good policy space and systems.

Strengthening transparency in public health systems and processes in national health programming, budget process information, procurement processes and progress of the health service provision between public and private providers. This is still a challenge in Uganda: case-in-view, the government through the pressure of civil society organizations drafted the National Health Insurance Bill 2012, to increase the number of people on the insurance services because Uganda is the only country in East Africa that has not yet implemented the national health insurance for its citizenry. Countries like Kenya, Tanzania and Rwanda have now benefited from the introduction of Insurance schemes (Dennis, 2012). They have meaningfully upturned their Maternal, Newborn and HIV/AIDS national Indices by covering the poor and the most vulnerable indigent groups such as women living in the remote rural and poor peri-urban settings. However, due to the gaps in the information, very few people know about the progress of the aforementioned relevant Bill in Uganda. It has not been brought yet on the floor of parliament, policy makers are still grappling with the decision of who should provide the service between the public and private sector, or a partnership of the two, and such information is still limited to the public domain. The National Health Insurance implementation failure is partly connected to the political climate whereby the government of Uganda scrapped off the user fees in 2001 in public health centres. Ugandans have been gullibly deluded to have access to free-of-cost and affordable quality healthcare services in public facilities. However, the citizenry have continuously spent out of their pocket and owing to indirect involved costs such as transportation expenditures, supplementary fees to pay for the drugs and other pharmaceutical supplies from private merchants in pharmacies, clinics and private health facilities.

Strengthening accountability. This implies ensuring that there is an oversight over the work of private entities, and that regular reviews are conducted and shown on the results of health investments by institutions and private independent entities’ participation in diverse spheres of health.

 

References

Centre, E. P. (2015). Liberalisation and the growth paradox in Uganda. Kampala: eprc.

Dennis, O. (2012). Introducing the National Health Insurance Scheme is a key Solution to Inequity, Access and Quality of Health Services in Uganda. Kampala: The Action Group for Health, Human Rights and HIV/AIDS.

Kakumirizi, M. (2018, 9 26). Nodding breakthrough: Why government must finance research. Kampala, Central, Uganda.

Melvin, W. B. (2005). Economics. Newyork: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Salim, S. (2018). How much it will cost you to get treatment at Mulago Specialized Women Hospital. Kampala: Pulselive.

 

 

 

Health Breaking News 305

Health Breaking News Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Health Breaking News 305

 

‘Will Ever WHO’s Roadmap for Medicines Move into Action? The Threat of Neoliberal Polices, Corporate Interests Collusion’ by Daniele Dionisio 

Pharmaceutical lobbying and pandemic stockpiling of Tamiflu: a qualitative study of arguments and tactics 

New drugs: how much are governments paying for innovation? 

Gullible Travails 

The Medicines Patent Pool and ViiV Healthcare sign extension of HIV licence agreement for dolutegravir to include Mongolia and Tunisia 

South Africa: Showdown – SA Takes On the US for Cheaper Drugs 

Local Sourcing and Supplier Development in Global Health: Analysis of the Supply Chain Management System’s Local Procurement in 4 Countries 

Pathologist Shortage Hits Zimbabwe Hard 

TB Remains World’s Single Largest Infectious Killer, says WHO 

Peru pioneers new treatment for drug-resistant TB — a photo story 

Better integration of mental health and HIV services needed 

Childbirth and Early Newborn Care Practices in 4 Provinces in China: A Comparison With WHO Recommendations 

Beyond the Safe Motherhood Initiative: Accelerated Action Urgently Needed to End Preventable Maternal Mortality 

Public health system integration of avoidable blindness screening and management, India 

Ebola continues to ravage northeastern Congo 

Ebola latest numbers as of 10 October 2018 

Tedros: Ebola outbreak highlights weakness for panic-based response 

New health threats emerge for Sulawesi survivors 

The Global Fund as an ATM plus 

Human Rights Reader 462 

‘The Global Implications of the Gag Rule and its Manifestations on Reproductive Health Rights in Uganda’ by Denis Bukenya and Michael Ssemakula    

Another Hidden Horror of 21st Century Conflict: Children’s Suffering 

Some governments are stepping up on inequality – new Oxfam global index launched today 

History RePPPeated – How public private partnerships are failing 

Report exposes how PPPs across the world drain the public purse, and fail to deliver in the public interest 

Effectiveness of strategies to improve health-care provider practices in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review 

Why Technology Isn’t Always the Answer in Global Health 

Who Controls the Tap? Addressing Water Security in Asia 

UN gives 12-year deadline to crush climate change 

Climate change aid ‘not reaching those who need it most’ 

“Our Choices Matter More Than Ever Before” To Limit Climate Change 

Human activities to suffer dramatically from 2°C increase 

Melania’s trip to Africa says a lot about US foreign policy under Trump