Low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) are challenged with a disproportionately high burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) and limited healthcare resources at their disposal to tackle the NCD epidemic. Understanding the patient journey for NCDs from the patients' perspective can help healthcare systems in these settings evolve their NCD care models to address the unmet needs of patients, enhance patient participation in their management, and progress towards better outcomes and quality of life. This paper aims to provide a theoretical framework outlining common touchpoints along the patient journey for NCDs in LMICs. It further aims to review influencing factors and recommend strategies to improve patient experience, satisfaction, and disease outcomes at each touchpoint. The co-occurrence of major NCDs makes it possible to structure the patient journey for NCDs into five broad touchpoints: awareness, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and adherence, with integration of palliative care along the care continuum pathway. The patients' perspective must be considered at each touchpoint in order to inform interventions as they experience firsthand the impact of NCDs on their quality of life and physical function and participate substantially in their disease management. Collaboratively designed health communication programs, shared decision-making, use of appropriate risk assessment tools, therapeutic alliances between the patient and provider for treatment planning, self-management tools, and improved access to palliative care are some strategies to help improve the patient journeys in LMICs. Long-term management of NCDs entails substantial self-management by patients, which can be augmented by pharmacists and nurse-led interventions. The digital healthcare revolution has heralded an increase in patient engagement, support of home monitoring of patients, optimized accurate diagnosis, personalized care plans, and facilitated timely intervention. There is an opportunity to integrate digital technology into each touchpoint of the patient journey, while ensuring minimal interruption to patients' care in the face of global health emergencies.

Background: There are increasing calls for patient involvement in sharing health research results, but no evidencebased recommendations to guide such involvement. Our objectives were to: (1) conduct a systematic review of the evidence on patient involvement in results sharing, (2) propose evidence-based recommendations to help maximize benefits and minimize risks of such involvement and (3) conduct this project with patient authors. Methods: To avoid research waste, we verified that no systematic reviews were registered or published on this topic. We co-created, with patients, a PRISMA-P-compliant protocol. We included peer-reviewed publications reporting the effects of patient involvement in preparing peer-reviewed publications or results summaries from health research studies. We searched (9/10/2017) MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and secondary information sources (until 11/06/2018). We assessed the risk of bias in eligible publications and extracted data using standardized processes. To evaluate patient involvement in this project, we co-created a Patient Authorship Experience Tool.Results: All nine eligible publications reported on patient involvement in preparing publications; none on preparing results summaries. Evidence quality was moderate. A qualitative synthesis of evidence indicated the benefits of patient involvement may outweigh the risks. We have proposed 21 evidence-based recommendations to help maximize the benefits and minimize the risks when involving patients as authors of peer-reviewed publications. The recommendations focus on practical actions patient and non-patient authors can take before (10 recommendations), during (7 recommendations) and after (4 recommendations) manuscript development. Using the Patient Authorship Experience Tool, both patient and non-patient authors rated their experience highly.Conclusions: Based on a systematic review, we have proposed 21 evidence-based recommendations to help maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of involving patients as authors of peer-reviewed publications.

No abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted global knowledge about, but lack of equitable access to, life-changing medicines, and other innovative medical products by populations in African low and middle income countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) and other international non-profit foundations and organizations are constantly striving to address inequity. In the 1970s, WHO initiated a regularly updated essential medicines list, together with the concept of national medicines policies (NMPs) to ensure access and availability, affordability, rational, and effective use of medicines which are considered essential in addressing predominant population health issues and disease burden. We studied the NMPs of Ghana, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe to highlight some of the important issues that these countries experience in the safe and effective use of medical products. Thailand is an example of how health technology assessment (HTA) can provide a country with an internationally supported, clearly defined and transparent process to broaden access to medicines and services. These medical services can add considerable value in accordance with local values and priorities. Involvement of civil society adds democratic legitimacy to such processes. Community health workers and patient advocacy groups are important in raising awareness and knowledge of safety issues and the effective use of quality medicines. They can apply pressure for increased funding to improve access to healthcare. Medicines and services that contribute to supported self-care are of benefit in any setting. Joint efforts across African countries such as with the African Medicines Agency are important in addressing some of the major health issues.

No abstract