Hampus Holmer

Background: Improving the adoption and implementation of policies to curb non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is a major challenge for better global health. The adoption and implementation of such policies remain deficient in various contexts, with limited insights into the facilitating and inhibiting factors. These policies have traditionally been treated as technical solutions, neglecting the critical influence of political economy dynamics. Moreover, the complex nature of these interventions is often not adequately incorporated into evidence for policy-makers. This study aims to systematically review and evaluate the factors affecting NCD policy adoption and implementation. Methods: We conducted a complex systematic review of articles discussing the adoption and implementation of World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) "best buys" NCD policies. We identified political economy factors and constructed a causal loop diagram (CLD) program theory to elucidate the interplay between factors influencing NCD policy adoption and implementation. A total of 157 papers met the inclusion criteria. Results: Our CLD highlights a central feedback loop encompassing three vital variables: (1) the ability to define, (re)shape, and pass appropriate policy into law; (2) the ability to implement the policy (linked to the enforceability of the policy and to addressing NCD local burden); and (3) ability to monitor progress, evaluate and correct the course. Insufficient context-specific data impedes the formulation and enactment of suitable policies, particularly in areas facing multiple disease burdens. Multisectoral collaboration plays a pivotal role in both policy adoption and implementation. Effective monitoring and accountability systems significantly impact policy implementation. The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) serve as a major barrier to defining, adopting, and implementing tobacco, alcohol, and diet-related policies. Conclusion: To advance global efforts, we recommend focusing on the development of robust accountability, monitoring, and evaluation systems, ensuring transparency in private sector engagement, supporting context-specific data collection, and effectively managing the CDoH. A system thinking approach can enhance the implementation of complex public health interventions.

Introduction: There are many case studies of corporations that have worked to undermine health policy implementation. It is unclear whether countries that are more exposed to corporate financial influence are systematically less likely to implement robust health policies that target firms’ financial interests. We aim to assess the association between corporate financial influence and implementation of WHO-recommended policies to constrain sales, marketing and consumption of tobacco, alcohol and unhealthy foods.Methods and analysis: We will perform a cross-sectional analysis of 172 WHO Member States using national datasets from 2015, 2017 and 2020. We will use random effects generalised least squares regression to test the association between implementation status of 12 WHO-recommended tobacco, alcohol and diet policies, and corporate financial influence, a metric that combines disclosure of campaign donations, public campaign finance, corporate campaign donations, legislature corrupt activities, disclosure by politicians and executive oversight. We will control for GDP per capita, population aged >65 years (%), urbanisation (%), level of democracy, continent, ethno-linguistic fractionalisation, legal origin, UN-defined ‘Small Island Developing States’ and Muslim population (%) (to capture alcohol policy differences). We will include year dummies to address the possibility of a spurious relationship between the outcome variable and the independent variables of interests. For example, there may be an upward global trend in policy implementation that coincides with an upward global trend in the regulation of lobbying and campaign finance.Ethics and dissemination: As this study uses publicly available data, ethics approval is not required. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication in the academic literature. All data, code and syntax will be made publicly available on GitHub.

Objective This study aimed to use qualitative interviews with surgical providers to explore challenges and solutions to providing surgical and anaesthesia care in Sierra Leone’s hospitals. Design Data were collected through anonymous, semistructured interviews. We used a qualitative framework approach to analyse interview data and determine themes relating to challenges that were reported. Setting A purposive sample of 12 hospitals was selected throughout Sierra Leone to include district and referral hospitals of varying ownership (private, non-governmental organisation and government). Participants The most senior surgical provider available during each hospital site visit participated in a semistructured interview. A total of 12 interviews were conducted. Results Providers described both challenges and solutions relating to the following categories: equipment and supplies, access to services, human resources, infrastructure, management and patient factors. These challenges were found to affect surgical care in hospitals by delaying surgical care, decreasing operative capacity and decreasing quality of care. Providers identified not only the root causes of these challenges, but also the varied workarounds and solutions they employ to overcome them. Conclusion Surgical providers can offer important insights into challenges affecting surgical services in hospitals. Despite working in challenging environments with limited resources, providers have developed innovative solutions to improve surgical and anaesthesia care in hospitals in Sierra Leone. Qualitative research has an important role to play in improving understanding of the challenges facing surgeons in low-income countries.

Background: Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophic and impoverishing financial consequences of surgery. Despite being rapidly taken up by practitioners, data points from which to derive the indicators were not defined, limiting comparability across time or settings. We convened global experts to evaluate and explicitly define—for the first time—the indicators to improve comparability and support achievement of 2030 goals to improve access to safe affordable surgical and anaesthesia care globally. Methods and findings: The Utstein process for developing and reporting guidelines through a consensus building process was followed. In-person discussions at a 2-day meeting were followed by an iterative process conducted by email and virtual group meetings until consensus was reached. The meeting was held between June 16 to 18, 2019; discussions continued until August 2020. Participants consisted of experts in surgery, anaesthesia, and obstetric care, data science, and health indicators from high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Considering each of the 6 indicators in turn, we refined overarching descriptions and agreed upon data points needed for construction of each indicator at current time (basic data points), and as each evolves over 2 to 5 (intermediate) and >5 year (full) time frames. We removed one of the original 6 indicators (one of 2 financial risk protection indicators was eliminated) and refined descriptions and defined data points required to construct the 5 remaining indicators: geospatial access, workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and catastrophic expenditure. A strength of the process was the number of people from global institutes and multilateral agencies involved in the collection and reporting of global health metrics; a limitation was the limited number of participants from low- or middle-income countries—who only made up 21% of the total attendees. Conclusions: To track global progress towards timely access to quality SAO care, these indicators—at the basic level—should be implemented universally as soon as possible. Intermediate and full indicator sets should be achieved by all countries over time. Meanwhile, these evolutions can assist in the short term in developing national surgical plans and collecting more detailed data for research studies.

Objectives: To assess the association between corporate political influence and implementation of WHO-recommended policies to constrain sales, marketing and consumption of tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy foods. Design: Cross-sectional analysis using national datasets from 2015, 2017, and 2020. Setting: Global analysis of data from 172 of the 194 WHO Member States Main outcome measures: We will use random effects multivariate regression to test the association between implementation status of 12 WHO-recommended tobacco, alcohol, and diet policies and corporate political influence , a metric that combines disclosure of campaign donations, public campaign finance, corporate campaign donations, legislature corrupt activities, disclosure by politicians, and executive oversight. We will control for GDP per capita, population aged >65 years, urbanization, level of democracy, continent, ethno-linguistic fractionalization, legal origin, Small Island Developing States, and Muslim population (to capture alcohol policy differences). We will include year dummies to address the possibility of a spurious relationship between the outcome variable and the independent variables of interests. For example, there may be an upward global trend in policy implementation that coincides with an upward global trend in in the regulation of lobbying and campaign finance. Ethics and dissemination: As this study uses publicly available data, ethics approval is not required. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication in the academic literature. All data, code, and syntax will be made publicly available on GitHub.

Undervisning i global hälsa förekommer i olika former vid samtliga läkarutbildningar i Sverige, och på vissa håll har kursmoment med fokus på internationell hälsa funnits i över trettio år. I denna artikel presenteras utvecklingen av global hälsa vid Sveriges läkarutbildningar – från dåtid till nutid och framtid. Textbidrag har inkommit från respektive lärosäte och sammanställts av Helena Nordenstedt och Hampus Holmer.

Introduction: Longer travel times are associated with increased adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Geospatial modelling has been increasingly used to estimate geographic proximity in emergency obstetric care. In this study, we aimed to assess the correlation between modelled and patient-reported travel times and to evaluate its clinical relevance. Methods: Women who delivered by caesarean section in nine hospitals were followed up with home visits at 1 month and 1 year. Travel times between the location before the delivery and the facility where caesarean section was performed were estimated, based on two models (model I Ouma et al; model II Munoz et al). Patient-reported and modelled travel times were compared applying a univariable linear regression analysis, and the relation between travel time and perinatal mortality was assessed. Results: The median reported travel time was 60 min, compared with 13 and 34 min estimated by the two models, respectively. The 2-hour access threshold correlated with a patient-reported travel time of 5.7 hours for model I and 1.8 hours for model II. Longer travel times were associated with transport by boat and ambulance, visiting one or two facilities before reaching the final facility, lower education and poverty. Lower perinatal mortality was found both in the group with a reported travel time of 2 hours or less (193 vs 308 per 1000 births, p<0.001) and a modelled travel time of 2 hours or less (model I: 209 vs 344 per 1000 births, p=0.003; model II: 181 vs 319 per 1000 births, p<0.001). Conclusion: The standard model, used to estimate geographical proximity, consistently underestimated the travel time. However, the conservative travel time model corresponded better to patient-reported travel times. The 2-hour threshold as determined by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, is clinically relevant with respect to reducing perinatal death, not a clear cut-off.