Organisation of primary health care in the Asia-Pacific region: developing a prioritised research agenda

Abstract

Health system planners in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) of the Asia-Pacific region seeking to reorient primary health care (PHC) systems to achieve universal health coverage may be hindered by lack of knowledge of what works in their setting. With limited resources for research available, it is important to identify evidence-based strategies for reorganising PHC delivery, determine where relevant evidence gaps exist and prioritise these for future study. This paper describes an approach for doing this using the best available evidence combined with consultation to establish evidence priorities. We first reviewed PHC organisational interventions in Asia-Pacific LMICs and ascertained evidence gaps. The largest gaps related to interventions to promote access to essential medicines, patient management tools, effective health promotion strategies and service planning and accountability. Evidence from Pacific Island countries was particularly scant. We then engaged an expert panel of 22 PHC stakeholders from seven Asia-Pacific LMICs in a Delphi exercise to identify priority questions for future research. Research priorities were: (1) identifying effective PHC service delivery models for chronic diseases; (2) devising sustainable models of disease integration; (3) optimising task shifting; (4) understanding barriers to care continuity; (5) projecting future PHC needs; and (6) designing appropriate PHC service packages. Notably, stakeholder-determined priorities reflected large, context-dependent system issues, while evidence gaps centred on discrete interventions. Future research on the organisation of PHC services in Asia-Pacific LMICs should incorporate codesign principles to engage researchers and national PHC system stakeholders, and innovative methods that build on existing evidence and account for system complexity.

Monitoring Universal Health Coverage reforms in primary health care facilities: Creating a framework, selecting and field-testing indicators in Kerala, India

“…Following standard convention and the procedure undertaken in prior ranking exercises [ 22 ], mean and median priority scores were calculated for each indicator by creating decision rules based on the distribution of ranks. For the final indicator list, indicators that received a median rank of 1 were included ( Table 1 ).…”

Health-Care Services as a Platform for Building Community Resilience among Minority Communities: An Israeli Pilot Study during the COVID-19 Outbreak

“…Such strategies include the facilitation of intersectoral collaboration between different stakeholders of health-care [ 77 , 78 ], educational interventions for both providers and consumers [ 79 , 80 ], intensive professional training, and health policy support (e.g., equitable payment of primary health care compared with other areas of specialization) [ 81 ]. Additionally, incorporating mobile and communication technologies into the services may provide many opportunities to involve patients in managing and monitoring their health as well as to promote collaboration with specialists and facilitating connections with nursing homes and home health [ 82 ]. Finally, there is a need for an expanded and more coordinated effort for research focused on primary health-care interventions in order to bridge the evidence policy and practice gaps [ 83 ].…”

Primary health care financing interventions: a systematic review and stakeholder-driven research agenda for the Asia-Pacific region

“…This study forms part of a larger project examining evidence gaps in the organisation of PHC service delivery in LMICs of the Asia-Pacific region 25 26. We followed a two-phase process to identify and prioritise evidence gaps related to PHC financing interventions.…”