Can international health programmes be sustained after the end of international funding: the case of eye care interventions in Ghana

BMC Health Services Research

Philip James¹  Karl Blanchet² 

[1] School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Salford, Salford, UK;London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK

关键词: Eye care;    Decision;    Analysis;    Hospital;    Administrator;    Diffusion of innovation;    Program;    Sustainability;   

Others  :  1134072
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6963-14-77

 received in 2012-10-12, accepted in 2014-02-17,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

There is general agreement amongst major international policy makers that sustainability is a key component of health interventions in developing countries. However, there is little evidence on the factors enabling or constraining sustainability. Diffusion of innovation theory can help explain how the continuation of activities is related to the attributes of innovations. Innovations are characterised by five attributes: (i) relative advantage; (ii) compatibility; (iii) complexity; (iv) triability; and (v) observability. An eye care programme was selected as a case study. The programme was implemented in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana and had been funded over a ten-year period by an international organisation.

Methods

Sustainability in the study was defined as the level of continuation of activities after the end of international funding. Measuring the continuation of activities involved checking whether each eye care activity continued (i.e. out-patient consultation, cataract surgery, outreach, school health, and statistics) or was interrupted after the end of Swiss Red Cross funding the 11 district hospitals where the programme was implemented.

Results

The results showed a relationship between the level of sustainability and the attributes of every activity. The activities with the lowest score for the attributes were less sustained. School health screening was the least sustained activity after the end of international funding. This activity also held the smallest score in terms of attributes: they were the most incompatible and most complex activities, as well as the least triable and observable activities, amongst the four district activities. In contrast, compared to the three other district activities, facility-based consultations were more likely to be routinised because they were perceived by the hospital managers as very compatible, and not complex.

Conclusions

Using diffusion of innovations theories can help predict the sustainability of specific activities within a health programme. The study also highlighted the need for disentangling the various components of a health programme in order to identify which activities are more likely to be continued within a health system. The same methodology could be used in a different setting and could help predict which innovations are more likely to be adopted and maintained over time.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Blanchet and James; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]World Health Organisation: Strengthening health systems: what works?. Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organisation; 2010. [Annual Report 2009]
• [2]World Health Organisation: Operational support for primary health care: the role of the district level in accelerating HFA/2000 for all Africans. Brazzaville: World Health Organisation; 1987.
• [3]UNICEF: The Bamako Initiative: Recommendations to the Executive Board for Programme Coordination 1989-1993. New York: United Nations Children’s Fund; 1988.
• [4]World Health Organisation: The Challenge of Implementation: District Health Systems for Primary Health Care. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 1988.
• [5]World Bank: World development report 1993: Investing In Health. New York: Oxford University Press; 1993.
• [6]OECD: OECD Sustainable Development Studies: Conducting Sustainability Assessments. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2008.
• [7]Honadle GH, Sant JV: Implementation for sustainability: Lessons from integrated rural development. West Hartford: Kumarian Press; 1985.
• [8]World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future: The Brundtland Report. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987.
• [9]Morgan LM: Community participation in health: perpetual allure, persistent challenge. Health Policy Plan 2001, 16:221-230.
• [10]Bell S, Morse S: Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the immeasurable. London: Earthscan; 2008.
• [11]Clark WC, Dickson NM: Sustainability science: the emerging research program. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:8059-8061.
• [12]Uphoff N, Esman MJ, Krishna A: Reasons for Success: Learning from Instructure Experiences in Rural Development. West Hartford: Kumarian Press; 1988.
• [13]Pluye P, Potvin L, Denis JL: Making public health programs last: conceptualizing sustainability. Eval Program Plann 2004, 27:121-133.
• [14]Mitchell G, May A, Mcdonald A: Picabue–a methodological framework for the development of indicators of sustainable development. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol 1995, 2:104-123.
• [15]Scheirer MA: Is sustainability possible? A review and commentary on empirical studies of program sustainability. Am J Eval 2005, 26:320-347.
• [16]Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR: Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res 1998, 13:87-108.
• [17]Gruen RL, Elliott JH, Nolan ML, Lawton PD, Parkhill A, McLaren CJ, Lavis JN: Sustainability science: an integrated approach for health-programme planning. Lancet 2008, 372:1579-1589.
• [18]Bloom G, Standing H, Lloyd R: Markets, information asymmetry and health care: towards new social contracts. Soc Sci Med 2008, 66:2076-2087.
• [19]Sarriot E, Ricca J, Ryan L, Basnet J, Arscott-Mills S: Measuring sustainability as a programming tool for health sector investments-report from a pilot sustainability assessment in five Nepalese health districts. Int J Health Plann Manage 2008, 24(4):326-350.
• [20]Institute of Medicine: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health Care System for the 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
• [21]Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T: The challenge of complexity in health care. Br Med J 2001, 323:625-628.
• [22]Sweeney K, Griffiths F: Complexity and Healthcare: An Introduction. London: Radcliff; 2002.
• [23]Blanchet K, Patel D: Applying principles of health system strengthening to eye care. Indian J Ophthalmol 2012, 60:470-474.
• [24]Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Shirey P: LS sets, lambda sets and other cohesive subsets. Soc Networks 1990, 12:337-357.
• [25]Rihani S: Complex systems theory and development practice. London: Zed Books; 2002.
• [26]Greenhalgh T: Role of routines in collaborative work in healthcare organisations. Br Med J 2008, 337:1269-1271.
• [27]Blanchet K: How to facilitate social contagion? Int J Health Policy Manage 2013, 1(3):189-192.
• [28]Rogers EM: Diffusion of innovations. 5th edition. New York: The Free Press; 1995.
• [29]Aubert BA, Hamel G: Adoption of smart cards in the medical sector: the Canadian experience. Soc Sci Med 2001, 53:879-894.
• [30]Denis JL, Hebert Y, Langley A, Lozeau D, Trottier LH: Explaining diffusion patterns for complex health care innovations. Health Care Manag Rev 2002, 27:60-73.
• [31]Grilli R, Lomas J: Evaluating the message: the relationship between compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline. Med Care 1994, 32:202-213.
• [32]Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T: Complexity science: The challenge of complexity in health care. [see comment]. BMJ 2001, 323:625-628.
• [33]Yetton P, Sharma R, Southon G: Successful IS innovation: the contingent contributions of innovation characteristics and implementation process. J Inf Technol 1999, 14:53-68.
• [34]Ghana at a glance [ http://devdata.worldbank.org/AAG/gha_aag.pdf webcite]
• [35]Ghana Data [ http://data.worldbank.org/country/ghana webcite]
• [36]Eye Care Unit Of GHS Discusses Eye Health [ http://www.ghana.gov.gh/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7971:eye-care-unit-of-ghs-discusses-eye-health&catid=26:health&Itemid=163 webcite]
• [37]Asante AD, Zwi AB: Factors influencing resource allocation decisions and equity in the health system of Ghana. Public Health 2009, 123:371-377.
• [38]Ghana Health Service: 2009 annual report. Accra, Ghana: Ghana Health Service; 2010.
• [39]Home Page [ http://www.chagghana.org/chag/ webcite]
• [40]Data Statistics [ http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf webcite]
• [41]Hagan M, Awua-Siaw TN: Mid Term Evaluation of the Brong Ahafo Eye Care Programme. Accra Ghana: Ministry of Health. Swiss Red Cross; 2003.
• [42]Addai E, Atisu H, Schaeffner B, Seddoh T: Evaluation of the SRC Support for Eye Care 2001-2003. Accra: Swiss Red Cross; 2003.
• [43]Blanchet K, James P: The role of social networks in the governance of health systems: the case of eye care systems in Ghana. Health Policy Plan 2012, 28(2):143-156.
• [44]Denzin N: Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.
• [45]Blanchet K, Girois S: Selection of sustainability indicators for health services in challenging environments: balancing scientific approach with political engagement. Eval Program Plann 2013, 38:28-32.
• [46]Fitzgerald L, Ferlie E, Wood M, Hawkins C: Interlocking interactions, the diffusion of innovations in health care. Human Relations 2002, 55:1429-1449.
• [47]World Health Organisation: Strategies for the prevention of blindness in national programmes: A primary health care approach. 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 1997.
• [48]Ryan B, Gross NC: The diffusion of hybrid seed corn in two Iowa communities. Rural Sociol 1943, 8:15-24.
• [49]Djellal F, Gallouj F: Innovation in hospitals: a survey of the literature. Eur J Health Econ 2007, 8:181-193.
• [50]Dirksen CD, Ament AJ, Go PM: Diffusion of six surgical endoscopic procedures in the Netherlands. Stimulating and restraining factors. Health Policy 1996, 37:91-104.
• [51]Singhal A, Rogers EM: Combatting AIDS: Communication strategies in action. New Dehli: Sage/India; 2003.
• [52]Marshall JG: Diffusion of innovation theory and end-user searching. Libr Inf Sci Res 1990, 12:55-69.
• [53]Greenhalgh T, Stramer K, Bratan T, Byrne E, Mohammad YJR: Introduction of shared electronic records: multi-site case study using diffusion of innovation theory. BMJ 2008, 337:a1786.
• [54]Ferlie E, Gabbay J, Fitzgerald L, Locock L, Dopson S: Evidence-based medicine and organisational change: an overview of some recent qualitative research. In Organisational Behaviour and Organisational Studies in Health Care: Reflections on the Future. Edited by Ashburner L. Basingstoke: Palgrave; 2001.
• [55]Charters WW, Pellegrin RS: Barriers to the innovation process: four case studies of differentiated staffing. Educ Q 1972, 9:3-4.
• [56]Coleman JS, Katz E, Menzel H: Medical innovation: a diffusion study. New York: Bobbs-Merrill; 1966.
• [57]Conway S: Strategic personal links in successful innovation: link-pins, bridges and liaisons. Creativity Innov manage 1997, 6:226-233.
• [58]Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlana F, Bate P, Kyriadou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organisations: systematic literature review and recommendations for future research. Millbank Q 2004, 82:581-629.
• [59]Valente TW, Fosados R: Diffusion of innovations and network segmentation: the part played by people in promoting health. Sex Transm Dis 2006, 33:S23-31.