BACKGROUND
Sexual violence is widespread in the eastern parts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, including in the North Kivu province. Moreover, in this region survivors of sexual violence often have limited access to care and encounter a variety of barriers when seeking care and support. The aim of this study was to explore community perceptions about access to care, barriers, enablers and possible actions to improve access to care for survivors of sexual violence in North Kivu. A deeper understanding of community perceptions about access to care can guide ongoing efforts to overcome barriers and increase access to care for survivors of sexual violence.
METHODS
The study utilised a qualitative design, based on focus group discussions with male and female adult community members in the study area. Previous experience of sexual violence was not a requirement. The transcripts from the discussions were analysed using manifest and latent qualitative content analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 18 focus group discussions were carried out. The analysis resulted in three main themes; Knowledge and misconceptions around medical consequences crucial for care seeking, Community and family attitudes playing a dual role in care seeking behaviours and Care seeking dependent on optimised healthcare facilities and sensitive staff.
CONCLUSIONS
Lack of correct knowledge, harmful attitudes from community and healthcare staff, and poorly adapted healthcare services constitute barriers to accessing care. Improved awareness raising around sexual violence is needed to address both lack of knowledge and misconceptions. Efforts should be made to build upon the community support models and actively work to improve community attitudes towards survivors of sexual violence. In addition, there is a need for better adapted healthcare services with improved proximity, access for different groups of survivors and respectful and well-trained healthcare staff.
BACKGROUND
Alleviating suffering and preserving dignity are essential components of healthcare. Patients in need of palliative care often require opioid medication to relieve breathlessness and pain. However, a lack of access to essential opioids, particularly morphine, remains a major challenge in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This is notably critical in the humanitarian context. We conducted two case studies to identify the barriers and facilitators of access to opioids, particularly morphine, for palliative care patients in humanitarian settings while exploring humanitarian healthcare workers’ perceptions and experiences with opioids.
METHODS
Two case studies were conducted based on two Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) projects which integrated palliative care: advanced HIV care in Patna, Bihar, India, and paediatric and neonatal care in the refugee context in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. Six semi-structured interviews were conducted with key MSF healthcare professionals. Interviews were conducted in English, video- and/or audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded and analysed using the grounded theory approach.
RESULTS
Several barriers impeding access to and use of essential opioids in palliative care were reported by the participants. These included limited availability, accessibility obstacles, sociocultural challenges such as low awareness and misconceptions, lack of healthcare providers’ training on opioid use, and burdensome regulatory processes. Most participants reported that clinical guidelines, familiarity with the use of opioids and interdisciplinary teamwork were important facilitators of opioid prescribing. Participants expressed the urgency for further educational and advocacy initiatives to improve access to essential opioids for patients requiring palliative care.
CONCLUSION
Humanitarian healthcare workers face multiple challenges, leading to inadequate access to essential opioid medication, which undermines effective palliative care delivery. Further training on the use of opioids and strong advocacy efforts led by humanitarian organizations and the medical community are critical to improving access to these essential medicines for the relief of pain and suffering.
BACKGROUND
Antibiotics are indispensable to modern healthcare, yet their equitable access remains a pressing global challenge. Factors contributing to inequities include insufficient evidence for optimal clinical use, limited registration, pricing for Reserve antibiotics, and supply chain challenges. These issues disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries, exacerbating antimicrobial resistance burdens.
OBJECTIVES
This paper explores the multifaceted dimensions of inequitable antibiotic access and proposes a comprehensive framework to address the crisis.
SOURCES
Published articles, grey literature analysis, and the authors' own expertise contributed to this article.
CONTENT
While much attention has been paid to push-and-pull incentives for antibiotic development, these interventions are inadequate to reach sustainable and equitable access to antibiotics. Improving equitable antibiotic access requires an ecosystem approach, involving multiple stakeholders and including public–private partnerships. The paper advocates for initiatives spanning research and development, regulatory pathways, procurement strategies, and financing mechanisms and suggests concrete interventions in each of these areas. The specific interventions and mix of public and private actors may vary according to antibiotic, market, and health system context, but must be designed to meet public health needs while also supporting a market that will sustain quality-assured production and delivery of antibiotics.
IMPLICATIONS
Addressing the challenge of equitable antibiotic access requires coordinated efforts across sectors and regions. By embracing an ecosystem approach centred on public health priorities, stakeholders can pave the way for a sustainable supply of antibiotics, and equitable access, safeguarding the future of global healthcare amidst the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance.
Pretomanid is a key anti-TB drug included in the WHO list of essential medications. The current EMA-approved label for pretomanid restricts its use to the regimen comprising bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) and only for extensively drug-resistant-TB or multidrug-resistant TB, "when antibiotics used for the latter form of TB do not work or cause unacceptable side effects." This restricted use implies that the older, prolonged and poorly tolerated regimens remain the recommended treatment for most cases of drug-resistant TB. The authors, representing many respiratory groups and societies, call for the label expansion of pretomanid to align with global guidelines, allowing for broader use.
BACKGROUND
Implementing health financing equity plays a determining role in achieving Universal Health Coverage. For this reason, the global health community stated multiple political declarations to guide health financing equity implementation in countries. The aim of this study was to investigate the global strategies for implementing health financing equity that emerged from political declarations made before 2024.
METHODS
Using a state-of-the-art review design, we identified the political declarations from the search of United Nations databases and the snowball search. We used textual and theoretical thematic analysis methods to extract the global strategies of health financing equity implementation that emerged from the political declarations. We grounded the global strategies in the existing practical framework - the Health Financing Progress Matrix of the World Health Organization. We employed a time-based descriptive analysis method to document the results. Quantitative information was used to shape the analysis.
RESULTS
In total, 40 political declarations were included in the review. From these declarations emerged the strategies of targeted, selective, contributive, universal, claims, proportionate, experimental, united, and aggregated financing to implement health financing equity in countries. Thirty nine of the 40 political declarations that labelled the global health community from 1944 until 2023 placed more efforts on duplicating the prevailing strategies. The declarations, categorised into nine groups (target, unity, universality, selectivity, contribution, aggregation, claims, experience, and proportionality-oriented political declarations), were insistent to press countries effectively implement the strategies.
CONCLUSION
The political declarations proved to be the essential markers of the global health community's efforts to raise the profile of health financing equity in countries. Although some of the global strategies that emerged from the political declarations have been shown promise in different countries, any global strategy is neither effective nor optimal for providing efficient and sustainable UHC in all countries. This lays the groundwork for careful management and adaptation of the global strategies to the diverse needs of the diverse population.
BACKGROUND
Considering the challenges of providing nutritional care in resource-limited settings (RLS), the International Working Group for Patients’ Right to Nutritional Care (WG) organized and expert meeting to propose recommendations and strategies to promote access to nutritional care and address disease-related malnutrition (DRM).
METHODS
During the ESPEN Congress in Milan, September 9 2024, a panel of 30 experts discussed the results of an online survey, and built consensus statements aimed at defining strategies and recommendations required to address barriers to accessing nutrition care in RLS. The online survey was developed to assess barriers to providing nutrition care in RLS and was completed by 58 respondents based in Low- and Middle-income Countries (LMIC), between July and August 2024.
RESULTS
Barriers to delivering quality nutrition care in these settings included low medical awareness and lack of the following: patient and family knowledge about DRM and its impact; nutrition risk screening and care implementation protocols; adequate reimbursement; medical nutrition dispositive; adapted diets; nutrition protocols; access to home medical and nutrition therapy. Gaps identified included: a) epidemiological data and evidence for best practices, b) education, training and capacity building and c) strengthening health systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Tackling DRM in resource-limited settings is challenging due to the high burden of malnutrition and the fact that current guidelines may not be fully applicable. The WG recommend a three-step strategy to promote access to nutrition care culminating in the development and implementation of resource –stratified guidelines.