Background In 2008, Ecuador started a national health reform based on the principles of Alma Ata to achieve Universal Health Coverage. While coverage indicators have increased, a systematic assessment of the impact of the reform on the delivery of health services at primary level is lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the 2008 health reform on the performance of primary health care services in Ecuador. Methods Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions (ACSC) are a subset of diseases where hospital admission is potentially avoidable by high quality well-functioning primary care. Thus, observing the behaviour of ACSC hospitalizations can serve as an indicator of how the primary health care level is performing. Crude and adjusted rates, stratified by sex, were calculated from ten selected ACSC hospitalization discharges during 22 years of data representing 11 years before and after the health reform. An interrupted time series analysis was then conducted by applying a negative binomial regression and adjusting for overdispersion and autocorrelation. Results Overall higher crude and adjusted rates for ACSC hospitalizations were observed in women compared to men; both increased gradually since the start of the observation, reaching a peak around 2010, and then started a downwards trend. In men, the incidence rate ratio increased significantly by 3 % per year during the period before the intervention. During the first year after intervention, an increase (13 %) was detected, and then a statistically significant 1 % decrease (IRR = 0.99; 95 % CI: 0.98, 0.99) was observed in the ACSC rate ratio per year in the period after the intervention. Similar trends and effect sizes were found for women. Conclusions The study revealed significant decreasing trends of the ACSC hospitalization rates in both sexes, indicating an improvement of the performance of the primary health care services following the 2008 national health reform. A continuous strengthening of the primary care model as well as a regular monitoring of ACSC hospitalization rates in the country is recommended. A health economic evaluation considering hospitalizations avoided and associated costs is also advisable.

Mobile health (mHealth) interventions hold promise for addressing the epidemic of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by assisting healthcare providers managing these disorders in low-resource settings. We aimed to systematically identify and assess provider-facing mHealth applications used to screen for, diagnose, or monitor NCDs in LMICs. In this systematic review, we searched the indexing databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central for studies published between January 2007 and October 2019. We included studies of technologies that were: (i) mobile phone- or tablet-based, (ii) able to screen for, diagnose, or monitor an NCD of public health importance in LMICs, and (iii) targeting health professionals as users. We extracted disease type, intervention purpose, target population, study population, sample size, study methodology, technology stage, country of development, operating system, and cost. Our initial search retrieved 13,262 studies, 315 of which met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Cardiology was the most common clinical domain of the technologies evaluated, with 89 publications. mHealth innovations were predominantly developed using Apple’s iOS operating system. Cost data were provided in only 50 studies, but most technologies for which this information was available cost less than 20 USD. Only 24 innovations targeted the ten NCDs responsible for the greatest number of disability-adjusted life years lost globally. Most publications evaluated products created in high-income countries. Reported mHealth technologies are well-developed, but their implementation in LMICs faces operating system incompatibility and a relative neglect of NCDs causing the greatest disease burden.

Communicable diseases remain a leading cause of death and disability in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). mHealth technologies carry considerable promise for managing these disorders within resource-poor settings, but many existing applications simply represent digital versions of existing guidelines or clinical calculators, communication facilitators, or patient self-management tools.We thus systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central for studies published between January 2007 and October 2019 involving technologies that were mobile phone- or tablet-based; able to screen for, diagnose, or monitor a communicable disease of importance in LMICs; and targeted health professionals as primary users. We excluded technologies that merely digitized existing paper-based tools or simply facilitated communication. Extracted data included disease category, pathogen type, diagnostic method, intervention purpose, study/target population, sample size, study methodology, development stage, accessory requirement, country of development, operating system, and cost. Given the search timeline and the extremely rapid turnover in the science concerning Coronavirus Disease 2019 and its novel variants, studies involving it were not included in the analysis.Of 13,262 studies identified by the screen, 33 met inclusion criteria. 12% were randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with 58% of publications representing technical descriptions. 62% of studies had 100 or fewer subjects. All studied technologies involved diagnosis or screening steps; none addressed the monitoring of infections. 52% focused on priority diseases (HIV, malaria, tuberculosis), but only 12% addressed a neglected tropical disease. Although most reported studies were priced under 20USD at time of publication, two thirds of the records did not yet specify a cost for the study technology.We conclude that there are only a small number of mHealth technologies focusing on innovative methods of screening and diagnosing communicable diseases potentially of use in LMICs. Rigorous RCTs, analyses with large sample size, and technologies assisting in the monitoring of diseases are needed.Author SummaryAlthough significant progress has been made in decreasing their worldwide impact, infectious diseases still represent a considerable burden of disease and death. This is especially the case in certain regions of low- and middle-income countries, where limited healthcare resources, personnel, and facilities can make it difficult to provide high quality care. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies are disruptive tools that hold considerable promise in these resource-constrained settings by circumventing some of the aforementioned obstacles.To better understand the availability and characteristics of mHealth technologies for use in low- and middle-income countries, we systematically searched for studies published in English between January 2007 through October 2019 to identify all existing mobile phone- or tablet-based innovations targeted at healthcare providers for use against infectious diseases in these settings and summarized their qualities and performance.We found that four times as many publications focused on tools that simply made data transfer more simple than there were on new tools for detecting or monitoring diseases. Few studies were tested under the most rigorous scientific methods. Many diagnostic technologies we identified require specialized attachments or additional laboratory equipment that connect to the smartphone or tablet, which could make their use in some settings more challenging.

Background Post-migration follow-up of migrants identified to be at-risk of developing tuberculosis during the initial screening is effective, but programmes vary across countries. We aimed to review main strategies applied to design follow-up programmes and analyse the effect of key programme characteristics on reported coverage (i.e., proportion of migrants screened among those eligible for screening) or yields (i.e., proportion of active tuberculosis among those identified as eligible for follow-up screening). Methods and findings We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting yields of follow-up screening programmes. Studies were included if they reported the rate of tuberculosis disease detected in international migrants through active case finding strategies and applied a post-migration follow-up (defined as one or more additional rounds of screening after finalising the initial round). For this, we retrieved all studies identified by Chan and colleagues for their systematic review (in their search until January 12, 2017) and included those reporting from active follow-up programmes. We then updated the search (from January 12, 2017 to September 30, 2022) using Medline and Embase via Ovid. Data were extracted on reported coverage, yields, and key programme characteristics, including eligible population, mode of screening, time intervals for screening, programme providers, and legal frameworks. Differences in follow-up programmes were tabulated and synthesised narratively. Meta-analyses in random effect models and exploratory analysis of subgroups showed high heterogeneity (I2 statistic > 95.0%). We hence refrained from pooling, and estimated yields and coverage with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), stratified by country, legal character (mandatory versus voluntary screening), and follow-up scheme (one-off versus repetitive screening) using forest plots for comparison and synthesis. Of 1,170 articles, 24 reports on screening programmes from 7 countries were included, with considerable variation in eligible populations, time intervals of screening, and diagnostic protocols. Coverage varied, but was higher than 60% in 15 studies, and tended to be lower in voluntary compared to compulsory programmes, and higher in studies from the United States of America, Israel, and Australia. Yield varied within and between countries and ranged between 53.05 (31.94 to 82.84) in a Dutch study and 5,927.05 (4,248.29 to 8,013.71) in a study from the United States. Of 15 estimates with narrow 95% CIs for yields, 12 were below 1,500 cases per 100,000 eligible migrants. Estimates of yields in one-off follow-up programmes tended to be higher and were surrounded by less uncertainty, compared to those in repetitive follow-up programmes. Yields in voluntary and mandatory programmes were comparable in magnitude and uncertainty. The study is limited by the heterogeneity in the design of the identified screening programmes as effectiveness, coverage and yields also depend on factors often underreported or not known, such as baseline incidence in the respective population, reactivation rate, educative and administrative processes, and consequences of not complying with obligatory measures. Conclusion Programme characteristics of post-migration follow-up screening for prevention and control of tuberculosis as well as coverage and yield vary considerably. Voluntary programmes appear to have similar yields compared with mandatory programmes and repetitive screening apparently did not lead to higher yields compared with one-off screening. Screening strategies should consider marginal costs for each additional round of screening.

No abstract