Gaurav Sharma, Christopher Morgan, Sarah Wanyoike, Stephanie Kenyon, Meru Sheel, Manish Jain, Malia Boggs, Folake Olayinka
{"title":"私营部门参与免疫接种计划:对中低收入国家 25 年来的良好实践证据进行务实的范围界定审查。","authors":"Gaurav Sharma, Christopher Morgan, Sarah Wanyoike, Stephanie Kenyon, Meru Sheel, Manish Jain, Malia Boggs, Folake Olayinka","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Many National Immunisation Programmes attempt to leverage the private sector ; however, there is limited consolidated and synthesised documentation on good practices, gaps and lessons learnt. A 2017 WHO guidance document recommended best practices for private sector engagement (PSE) in immunisation. We conducted a pragmatic scoping review to identify gaps, update and consolidate evidence on promising practices in PSE for vaccination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Building on two previous reviews published in 2011 and 2017, we conducted a pragmatic scoping review of peer-reviewed publications from low-income and middle-income countries since September 2016 in PubMed that pertained to PSE and immunisation service delivery. We extracted and analysed findings using a new analytical framework covering motivations, enablers and barriers, risks and challenges, and engagement mechanisms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We collated over 80 well-documented analyses of PSE for vaccination, derived from 54 peer-reviewed publications from 1998 to 2016 included in prior reviews, 21 new publications from 24 countries published since 2016 and 1 new systematic review. The level of PSE was mixed, ranging from 3%-4% to >60% of all childhood vaccinations. Promising practices for PSE included using governance and policy to leverage private providers' motivations and including them in programme efforts. Planning and monitoring efforts were effective when linked with regulatory requirements based on national standards for services, reporting and performance monitoring. Information systems were effective when they included private sector services in vaccine monitoring and surveillance. Challenges identified included ensuring compliance with national schedules and standards and minimising financial exclusion. Few studies documented successful public-private partnership models or other innovative financing models.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The published evidence captures numerous strategies to facilitate stronger immunisation programme engagement with the private sector. Stronger PSE can potentially reach zero-dose and underimmunised populations in low-resource settings and build resilient systems. Untapped opportunities exist for more structured testing of approaches to inform global guidance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"8 Suppl 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Private sector engagement for immunisation programmes: a pragmatic scoping review of 25 years of evidence on good practice in low-income and middle-income countries.\",\"authors\":\"Gaurav Sharma, Christopher Morgan, Sarah Wanyoike, Stephanie Kenyon, Meru Sheel, Manish Jain, Malia Boggs, Folake Olayinka\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014728\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Many National Immunisation Programmes attempt to leverage the private sector ; however, there is limited consolidated and synthesised documentation on good practices, gaps and lessons learnt. A 2017 WHO guidance document recommended best practices for private sector engagement (PSE) in immunisation. We conducted a pragmatic scoping review to identify gaps, update and consolidate evidence on promising practices in PSE for vaccination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Building on two previous reviews published in 2011 and 2017, we conducted a pragmatic scoping review of peer-reviewed publications from low-income and middle-income countries since September 2016 in PubMed that pertained to PSE and immunisation service delivery. We extracted and analysed findings using a new analytical framework covering motivations, enablers and barriers, risks and challenges, and engagement mechanisms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We collated over 80 well-documented analyses of PSE for vaccination, derived from 54 peer-reviewed publications from 1998 to 2016 included in prior reviews, 21 new publications from 24 countries published since 2016 and 1 new systematic review. The level of PSE was mixed, ranging from 3%-4% to >60% of all childhood vaccinations. Promising practices for PSE included using governance and policy to leverage private providers' motivations and including them in programme efforts. Planning and monitoring efforts were effective when linked with regulatory requirements based on national standards for services, reporting and performance monitoring. Information systems were effective when they included private sector services in vaccine monitoring and surveillance. Challenges identified included ensuring compliance with national schedules and standards and minimising financial exclusion. Few studies documented successful public-private partnership models or other innovative financing models.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The published evidence captures numerous strategies to facilitate stronger immunisation programme engagement with the private sector. Stronger PSE can potentially reach zero-dose and underimmunised populations in low-resource settings and build resilient systems. Untapped opportunities exist for more structured testing of approaches to inform global guidance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"8 Suppl 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014728\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014728","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言:许多国家免疫接种计划都试图利用私营部门;然而,有关良好做法、差距和经验教训的综合文献却十分有限。2017 年世卫组织的一份指导文件推荐了私营部门参与免疫接种(PSE)的最佳实践。我们进行了一次务实的范围界定审查,以找出差距,更新和整合有关私营部门参与疫苗接种的可行做法的证据:在 2011 年和 2017 年发表的前两篇综述的基础上,我们对 2016 年 9 月以来低收入和中等收入国家在 PubMed 上发表的有关 PSE 和免疫接种服务提供的同行评审出版物进行了务实的范围界定综述。我们使用一个新的分析框架提取并分析了研究结果,该框架涵盖了动机、推动因素和障碍、风险和挑战以及参与机制:我们整理了 80 多项关于疫苗接种 PSE 的有据可查的分析,这些分析来自于 1998 年至 2016 年间的 54 篇同行评审出版物(包括之前的综述)、2016 年以来发表的来自 24 个国家的 21 篇新出版物以及 1 篇新的系统综述。PSE水平参差不齐,从占所有儿童疫苗接种的3%-4%到>60%不等。有前途的 PSE 实践包括利用治理和政策来调动私营提供者的积极性,并将他们纳入计划工作中。当规划和监测工作与基于国家服务、报告和绩效监测标准的监管要求相联系时,规划和监测工作是有效的。信息系统在将私营部门服务纳入疫苗监测和监督时是有效的。已确定的挑战包括确保遵守国家时间表和标准,以及尽量减少资金排斥。很少有研究记录了成功的公私合作模式或其他创新融资模式:已发表的证据收集了许多促进免疫接种计划与私营部门加强合作的策略。更有力的 PSE 有可能惠及低资源环境中的零剂量和免疫接种不足人群,并建立弹性系统。在对各种方法进行更有条理的测试,为全球指导提供信息方面,还存在尚未开发的机会。
Private sector engagement for immunisation programmes: a pragmatic scoping review of 25 years of evidence on good practice in low-income and middle-income countries.
Introduction: Many National Immunisation Programmes attempt to leverage the private sector ; however, there is limited consolidated and synthesised documentation on good practices, gaps and lessons learnt. A 2017 WHO guidance document recommended best practices for private sector engagement (PSE) in immunisation. We conducted a pragmatic scoping review to identify gaps, update and consolidate evidence on promising practices in PSE for vaccination.
Methods: Building on two previous reviews published in 2011 and 2017, we conducted a pragmatic scoping review of peer-reviewed publications from low-income and middle-income countries since September 2016 in PubMed that pertained to PSE and immunisation service delivery. We extracted and analysed findings using a new analytical framework covering motivations, enablers and barriers, risks and challenges, and engagement mechanisms.
Results: We collated over 80 well-documented analyses of PSE for vaccination, derived from 54 peer-reviewed publications from 1998 to 2016 included in prior reviews, 21 new publications from 24 countries published since 2016 and 1 new systematic review. The level of PSE was mixed, ranging from 3%-4% to >60% of all childhood vaccinations. Promising practices for PSE included using governance and policy to leverage private providers' motivations and including them in programme efforts. Planning and monitoring efforts were effective when linked with regulatory requirements based on national standards for services, reporting and performance monitoring. Information systems were effective when they included private sector services in vaccine monitoring and surveillance. Challenges identified included ensuring compliance with national schedules and standards and minimising financial exclusion. Few studies documented successful public-private partnership models or other innovative financing models.
Conclusion: The published evidence captures numerous strategies to facilitate stronger immunisation programme engagement with the private sector. Stronger PSE can potentially reach zero-dose and underimmunised populations in low-resource settings and build resilient systems. Untapped opportunities exist for more structured testing of approaches to inform global guidance.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.