Background: Recent health system shocks such as the Ebola outbreak of 2014–2016 and the global financial crisis of 2008 have generated global health interest in the concept of resilience. The concept is however not new, and has been applied to other sectors for a longer period of time. We conducted a review of empirical literature from both the health and other sectors to synthesize evidence on organizational resilience. Methods: We systematically searched for literature in PubMed, Econlit, EBSCOHOST databases, google, and Google Scholar and manually searched the reference lists of selected papers. We identified 34 papers that met our inclusion criteria. We analysed data from the selected papers by thematic review. Results: Resilience was generally taken to mean a system’s ability to continue to meet its objectives in the face of challenges. The concepts of resilience that were used in the selected papers emphasized not just a system’s capacity to withstand shocks, but also to adapt and transform. The resilience of organizations was influenced by the following factors: Material resources, preparedness and planning, information management, collateral pathways and redundancy, governance processes, leadership practices, organizational culture, human capital, social networks and collaboration. Conclusion: A common theme across the selected papers is the recognition of resilience as an emergent property of complex adaptive systems. Resilience is both a function of planning for and preparing for future crisis (planned resilience), and adapting to chronic stresses and acute shocks (adaptive resilience). Beyond resilience to acute shocks, the resilience of health systems to routine and chronic stress (everyday resilience) is also key. Health system software is as, if not more important, as its hardware in nurturing health system resilience.

The spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Africa is poorly described. The first case of SARS-CoV-2 in Kenya was reported on March 12, 2020 and an overwhelming number of cases and deaths were expected but by July 31, 2020 there were only 20,636 cases and 341 deaths. However, the extent of SARS-CoV-2 exposure in the community remains unknown. We determined the prevalence of anti–SARS-CoV-2 IgG among blood donors in Kenya in April-June 2020. Crude seroprevalence was 5.6% (174/3098). Population-weighted, test-performance-adjusted national seroprevalence was 4.3% (95% CI 2.9–5.8%) and was highest in urban counties, Mombasa (8.0%), Nairobi (7.3%) and Kisumu (5.5%). SARS-CoV-2 exposure is more extensive than indicated by case-based surveillance and these results will help guide the pandemic response in Kenya, and across Africa.

Background There are no data on SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Africa though the COVID-19 epidemic curve and reported mortality differ from patterns seen elsewhere. We estimated the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence among blood donors in Kenya. Methods We measured anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG prevalence by ELISA on residual blood donor samples obtained between April 30 and June 16, 2020. Assay sensitivity and specificity were 83% (95% CI 59, 96%) and 99.0% (95% CI 98.1, 99.5%), respectively. National seroprevalence was estimated using Bayesian multilevel regression and post-stratification to account for non-random sampling with respect to age, sex and region, adjusted for assay performance. Results Complete data were available for 3098 of 3174 donors, aged 15-64 years. By comparison with the Kenyan population, the sample over-represented males (82% versus 49%), adults aged 25-34 years (40% versus 27%) and residents of coastal Counties (49% versus 9%). Crude overall seroprevalence was 5.6% (174/3098). Population-weighted, test-adjusted national seroprevalence was 5.2% (95% CI 3.7, 7.1%). Seroprevalence was highest in the 3 largest urban Counties; Mombasa (9.3% [95% CI 6.4, 13.2%)], Nairobi (8.5% [95% CI 4.9, 13.5%]) and Kisumu (6.5% [95% CI 3.3, 11.2%]). Conclusions We estimate that 1 in 20 adults in Kenya had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during the study period. By the median date of our survey, only 2093 COVID-19 cases and 71 deaths had been reported through the national screening system. This contrasts, by several orders of magnitude, with the numbers of cases and deaths reported in parts of Europe and America when seroprevalence was similar.

BackgroundMonitoring the incidence and intensity of catastrophic health expenditure, as well as the impoverishing effects of out of pocket costs to access healthcare, is a key part of benchmarking Kenya’s progress towards reducing the financial burden that households experience when accessing healthcare.MethodsThe study relies on data from the nationally-representative Kenya Household Expenditure and Utilization Survey conducted in 2013 (n =33,675). We undertook health equity analysis to estimate the incidence and intensity of catastrophic expenditure. Households were considered to have incurred catastrophic expenditures if their annual out of-pocket health expenditures exceeded 40% of their annual non-food expenditure. We assessed the impoverishing effects of out of pocket payments using the Kenya national poverty line. We distinguished between direct payments for healthcare such as payments for consultation, medicines, medical procedures, and total healthcare expenditure that includes direct healthcare payments and the cost of transportation to and from health facilities. We used logistic regression analysis to explore the factors associated with the incidence of catastrophic expenditures.ResultsWhen only direct payments to healthcare providers were considered, the incidence of catastrophic expenditures was 4.52%. When transport costs are included, the incidence of catastrophic expenditure increased to 6.58%. 453,470 Kenyans are pushed into poverty annually as a result of direct payments for healthcare. When the cost of transport is included, that number increases by more than one third to 619,541. Unemployment of the household head, presence of an elderly person, a person with a chronic ailment, a large household size, lower household social-economic status, and residence in marginalized regions of the country are significantly associated with increased odds of incurring catastrophic expenditures.ConclusionsKenyan policy makers should prioritize extending pre-payment mechanisms to more vulnerable groups, specifically the poor, the elderly, those suffering from chronic ailments and those living in marginalized regions of the country. The range of services covered under these mechanisms should also be extended such that the proportion of direct costs paid to access care is reduced. Policy makers should also prioritize reducing supply side bottlenecks such as availability of healthcare facilities in close proximity to the population, especially in rural and marginalized areas, and improvements in quality of care. For the poor and the vulnerable, initiatives to cover the cost of transport to and from a health facility, such as transport vouchers could also be explored.

ContributorsKH and AR led conceptualisation and drafting of the paper. AD led the study on nurses in Uttar Pradesh, ND the study on accredited social health activists in Uttar Pradesh, HW and JR the study on community health workers and community health worker policy in Sierra Leone, LM, JK, and AR the study on gender parity in the global physician workforce, and KH, YA, and NS the study on selfhelp groups in India. FS and RF-M led development of the case on the nurse from eSwatini. VP, RH, and EBa did the systematic literature review on health systems models. JGS and AR led the systematic review on gender transformative clinical interventions. KH, LM, JK, FS, RF-M, AD, YA, JY, EBl, NB, JGS, and AR did the critical reviews of the literature on gender inequalities and gender norms affecting health and helped draft pieces of those reviews, with consideration of diverse geographic contexts. All authors offered critical inputs and reviews of this work, contributed intellectual and substantive revisions to the writing, and provided final approval of the submitted version.

Recent global crises have brought into sharp relief the absolute necessity of resilient health systems that can recognise and react to societal crises. While such crises focus the global mind, the real work lies, however, in being resilient in the face of routine, multiple challenges. But what are these challenges and what is the work of nurturing everyday resilience in health systems? This paper considers these questions, drawing on long-term, primarily qualitative research conducted in three different district health system settings in Kenya and South Africa, and adopting principles from case study research methodology and meta-synthesis in its analytic approach. The paper presents evidence of the instability and daily disruptions managed at the front lines of the district health system. These include patient complaints, unpredictable staff, compliance demands, organisational instability linked to decentralisation processes and frequently changing, and sometimes unclear, policy imperatives. The paper also identifies managerial responses to these challenges and assesses whether or not they indicate everyday resilience, using two conceptual lenses. From this analysis, we suggest that such resilience seems to arise from the leadership offered by multiple managers, through a combination of strategies that become embedded in relationships and managerial routines, drawing on wider organisational capacities and resources. While stable governance structures and adequate resources do influence everyday resilience, they are not enough to sustain it. Instead, it appears important to nurture the power of leaders across every system to reframe challenges, strengthen their routine practices in ways that encourage mindful staff engagement, and develop social networks within and outside organisations. Further research can build on these insights to deepen understanding.

Recent health system shocks such as the Ebola disease outbreak have focused global health attention on the notion of resilient health systems. In this commentary, we reflect on the current framing of the concept of resilience in health systems discourse and propose a reframing. Specifically, we propose that: (1) in addition to sudden shocks, health systems face the ongoing strain of multiple factors. Health systems need the capacity to continue to deliver services of good quality and respond effectively to wider health challenges. We call this capacity everyday resilience; (2) health system resilience entails more than bouncing back from shock. In complex adaptive systems (CAS), resilience emerges from a combination of absorptive, adaptive and transformative strategies; (3) nurturing the resilience of health systems requires understanding health systems as comprising not only hardware elements (such as finances and infrastructure), but also software elements (such as leadership capacity, power relations, values and appropriate organizational culture). We also reflect on current criticisms of the concept of resilient health systems, such as that it assumes that systems are apolitical, ignoring actor agency, promoting inaction, and requiring that we accept and embrace vulnerability, rather than strive for stronger and more responsive systems. We observe that these criticisms are warranted to the extent that they refer to notions of resilience that are mismatched with the reality of health systems as CAS. We argue that the observed weaknesses of resilience thinking can be addressed by reframing and applying a resilience lens that is better suited to the attributes of health systems as CAS.Keywords: Health system resilience, complex adaptive systems, everyday resilience Key Messages• The concept of resilience can provide a useful framework for health systems strengthening, if it is reframed to align with the attributes of health systems as complex adaptive systems.• The resilience of health systems is an emergent property that results from the combination of absorptive, adaptive and transformative strategies applied within the system. These strategies are underpinned by cognitive, behavioural and contextual capacities.• Resilience is about (1) everyday resilience, not simply responses to sudden shocks, (2) health system software, not only its hardware and (3) creative adaptation, and transformation, rather than simply bouncing back.

This article identifies and describes the reforms undertaken by the National Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF) and examines their implications for Kenya's quest to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). We undertook a review of published and grey literature to identify key reforms that had been implemented by the NHIF since 2010. We examined the reforms undertaken by the NHIF using a health financing evaluation framework that considers the feasibility, equity, efficiency, and sustainability of health financing mechanisms. We found the following NHIF reforms: (1) the introduction of the Civil Servants Scheme (CSS), (2) the introduction of a stepwise quality improvement system, (3) the health insurance subsidy for the poor (HISP), (4) revision of monthly contribution rates and expansion of the benefit package, and (5) the upward revision of provider reimbursement rates. Though there are improvements in several areas, these reforms raise equity, efficiency, feasibility, and sustainability concerns. The article concludes that though NHIF reforms in Kenya are well intentioned and there has been improvement in several areas, design attributes could compromise the extent to which they achieve their intended goal of providing universal financing risk protection to the Kenyan population. BACKGROUND Low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) are increasingly adopting universal health coverage (UHC) as their health policy priority. 1 To achieve UHC, countries must expand the range of services they provide to their citizens, expand population coverage with a prepayment mechanism, and reduce the proportion of direct costs that citizens pay to access health care services. 2 Kenya has made a commitment to achieve UHC by 2022. The country has a mixed health financing system that is financed by revenues collected by the government (national and county