Preliminary evidence highlights several elements that influence the ACP process and provides a variety of features that could support successful, effective, and sustainable ACP implementation. However, this evidence is compartmentalized and limited. Further studies evaluating ACP as a unified program and assessing the impact of ACP for different populations, settings, and contexts are needed to develop programs that are able to unleash ACP's full potential.

Cochrane methodology for conducting overviews of systematic reviews. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews tool. The following databases were searched from inception to April 2017: MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. Searches were supplemented with gray literature and manual searches.ResultEighty systematic reviews, covering 1,662 single articles, show that ACP-related research focuses on nine main topics: (1) ACP as part of end-of-life or palliative care interventions, (2) care decision-making; (3) communication strategies; (4) factors influencing ACP implementation; (5) ACP for specific patient groups, (6) ACP effectiveness; (7) ACP experiences; (8) ACP cost; and (9) ACP outcome measures. The majority of this research was published since 2014, its quality ranges from moderate to low, and reports on documentation, concordance, preferences, and resource utilization outcomes.Significance of resultsDespite the surge of ACP research, there are major knowledge gaps about ACP initiation, timeliness, optimal content, and impact because of the low quality and fragmentation of the available evidence. Research has mostly focused on discrete aspects within ACP instead of using a holistic evaluative approach that takes into account its intricate working mechanisms, the effects of systems and contexts, and the impacts on multilevel stakeholders. Higher quality studies and innovative interventions are needed to develop effective ACP programs and address research gaps.

No abstract

There is growing evidence that political economy factors are central to whether or not proposed health financing reforms are adopted, but there is little consensus about which political and institutional factors determine the fate of reform proposals. One set of scholars see the relative strength of interest groups in favour of and opposed to reform as the determining factor. An alternative literature identifies aspects of a country’s political institutions–specifically the number and strength of formal ‘veto gates’ in the political decision-making process—as a key predictor of reform’s prospects. A third group of scholars highlight path dependence and ‘policy feedback’ effects, stressing that the sequence in which health policies are implemented determines the set of feasible reform paths, since successive policy regimes bring into existence patterns of public opinion and interest group mobilization which can lock in the status quo. We examine these theories in the context of Malaysia, a successful health system which has experienced several instances of proposed, but ultimately blocked, health financing reforms. We argue that policy feedback effects on public opinion were the most important factor inhibiting changes to Malaysia’s health financing system. Interest group opposition was a closely related factor; this opposition was particularly powerful because political leaders perceived that it had strong public support. Institutional veto gates, by contrast, played a minimal role in preventing health financing reform in Malaysia. Malaysia’s dramatic early success at achieving near-universal access to public sector healthcare at low cost created public opinion resistant to any change which could threaten the status quo. We conclude by analysing the implications of these dynamics for future attempts at health financing reform in Malaysia.

IntroductionSurgical access is central to universalising health coverage, yet 5 billion people lack timely access to safe surgical services. Surgical need is particularly acute in post conflict settings like Sierra Leone. There is limited understanding of the barriers and opportunities at the service delivery and community levels. Focusing on fractures and wound care which constitute an enormous disease burden in Sierra Leone as a proxy for general surgical need, we examine provider and patient perceived factors impeding or facilitating surgical care in the post-Ebola context of a weakened health system.MethodsAcross Western Area Urban (Freetown), Bo and Tonkolili districts, 60 participants were involved in 38 semistructured interviews and 22 participants in 5 focus group discussions. Respondents included surgical providers, district-level policy-makers, traditional healers and patients. Data were thematically analysed, combining deductive and inductive techniques to generate codes.ResultsInteracting demand-side and supply-side issues affected user access to surgical services. On the demand side, high cost of care at medical facilities combined with the affordability and convenient mode of payment to the traditional health practitioners hindered access to the medical facilities. On the supply side, capacity shortages and staff motivation were challenges at facilities. Problems were compounded by patients’ delaying care mainly spurred by sociocultural beliefs in traditional practice and economic factors, thereby impeding early intervention for patients with surgical need. In the absence of formal support services, the onus of first aid and frontline trauma care is borne by lay citizens.ConclusionWithin a resource-constrained context, supply-side strengthening need accompanying by demand-side measures involving community and traditional actors. On the supply side, non-specialists could be effectively utilised in surgical delivery. Existing human resource capacity can be enhanced through better incentives for non-physicians. Traditional provider networks can be deployed for community outreach. Developing a lay responder system for first-aid and front-line support could be a useful mechanism for prompt clinical intervention.

IntroductionThere continues to be a large gap between need and actual use of surgery in low-resource settings. While policy frequently focuses on expanding the supply of services, demand-side factors are at least as important in determining under utilisation and over utilisation. The aim of this study is to understand how these factors influence the use of selected essential obstetric and gynaecological surgical procedures in the underserved and remote setting of North-East India.MethodsThe study combines and makes use of data from a variety of surveys and routine systems. Descriptive analysis of variations in caesarean section, hysterectomy and sterilisation and then multivariate logit analysis of demand-side and supply-side factors on access to these services is undertaken.ResultsSurgical rates vary substantially both across and within North-East India, correlated with service capacity and socioeconomic status. Travel times to surgical facilities are associated with rates of caesarean section and hysterectomy but not sterilisation where services are much more deconcentrated. Travel is less important for surgery in private facilities where capacity is much more dispersed but dominated by the non-poor. The presence of non-doctor medical staff is associated with lower levels of surgical activity.ConclusionIn low resource, remote settings policy interventions to improve access to services must recognise that surgical rates in low-resource settings are heavily influenced by demand-side factors. As well as boosting services, mechanisms need to mitigate demand-side barriers particularly distance and influence practice to encourage surgical intervention only where clinically indicated.

Health system reforms across high-and middle-income countries often involve changes to public hospital governance. Corporatization is one such reform, in which public sector hospitals are granted greater functional independence while remaining publicly owned. In theory, this can improve public hospital efficiency, while retaining a public service ethos. However, the extent to which efficiency gains are realized and public purpose is maintained depends on policy choices about governance and payment systems. We present a case study of Malaysia's National Heart Institute (IJN), which was created in 1992 by corporatization of one department in a large public hospital. The aim of the paper is to examine whether IJN has achieved the goals for which it was created, and if so, whether it provides a potential model for further reforms in Malaysia and other similar health systems. Using a combination of document analysis and key informant interviews, we examine key governance, health financing and payment, and equity issues. For governance, we highlight the choice to have IJN owned by and answerable to a Ministry of Finance (MOF) holding company and MOF-appointed board, rather than the Ministry of Health (MOH). On financing and payment, we analyze the implications of IJN's combined role as fee-for-service provider to MOH as well as provider of care to private patients. For equity, we analyze the targeting of IJN care across publicly-referred and private patients. These issues demonstrate unresolved tensions between IJN's objectives and public service goals. As an institutional innovation that has endured for 28 years and grown dramatically in size and revenue, IJN's trajectory offers critical insights on the relevance of the hybrid public-private models for hospitals in Malaysia as well as in other middle-income countries. While IJN appears to have achieved its goal of establishing itself as a commercially viable, publicly owned center of clinical excellence in Malaysia, the value for money and equity of the services it provides to the Ministry of Health remain unclear. IJN is accountable to a small Ministry of Finance holding company, which means that detailed information required to evaluate these critical questions is not published. The case of IJN highlights that corporatization cannot achieve its stated goals of efficiency, innovation, and equity in isolation; rather it must be supported by broader reforms, including of health financing, payment, governance, and transparency, in order to ensure that autonomous hospitals improve quality and provide efficient care in an equitable way.

It is important to carry out the assessment of students correctly and in an unbiased way; but more importantly, the assessment decisions should also be conveyed to the students in an unbiased manner, even if the decisions are negative ones. But here lies the catch – many a times, assessors tend to shy away from conveying such negative decisions properly to the students due to various reasons. This article is an effort to identify such reasons and their implications in the education scenario.