Background:There was an outbreak of acute hepatitis in Mylapore village, Kollam district, Kerala, southern India during February to June 2013. An outbreak investigation was initiated with the objective of describing the epidemiological features of the hepatitis outbreak.Materials and Methods:House-to-house visits were undertaken to identify symptomatic cases. The outbreak was described in terms of person, place and time. Hypothesis was generated based on findings from descriptive study, laboratory investigation of water samples, and environmental observations. A case-control study was designed to test the hypothesis. Chi-square test, univariate analysis, and logistic regression to identify the risk factors associated with hepatitis A infection were done.Results:Line list generated consisted of 45 cases. Attack rate was the highest among the age group 15-24 years (4.6%) followed by 5-14 years (3.1%). The geographical distribution of the cases suggested a clustering around the water supply through the pipeline and epidemic curve showed a sharp rise in cases suggestive of a common source outbreak. Water samples collected form pipeline showed evidence of fecal contamination and absence of residual chlorine. In the case-control study, having consumed water from the pipeline (odds ratio: 9.01 [95% confidence interval: 2.16-37.61]) was associated with the hepatitis A cases.Conclusion:The time frame of disease occurrence, environmental observations, anecdotal evidences, laboratory results and results of the analytical study indicated the possibility of occurrence of hepatitis A outbreak as a result of pipe water contamination supplied from a bore well. The study warrants establishment of an efficient water quality surveillance system.

In line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the target for achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC), state level initiatives to promote health with “no-one left behind” are underway in India. In Kerala, reforms under the flagship Aardram mission include upgradation of Primary Health Centres (PHCs) to Family Health Centres (FHCs, similar to the national model of health and wellness centres (HWCs)), with the proactive provision of a package of primary care services for the population in an administrative area. We report on a component of Aardram’s monitoring and evaluation framework for primary health care, where tracer input, output, and outcome indicators were selected using a modified Delphi process and field tested. A conceptual framework and indicator inventory were developed drawing upon literature review and stakeholder consultations, followed by mapping of manual registers currently used in PHCs to identify sources of data and processes of monitoring. The indicator inventory was reduced to a list using a modified Delphi method, followed by facility-level field testing across three districts. The modified Delphi comprised 25 participants in two rounds, who brought the list down to 23 approved and 12 recommended indicators. Three types of challenges in monitoring indicators were identified: appropriateness of indicators relative to local use, lack of clarity or procedural differences among those doing the reporting, and validity of data. Further field-testing of indicators, as well as the revision or removal of some may be required to support ongoing health systems reform, learning, monitoring and evaluation.

Introduction India’s Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY) is the world’s largest health assurance scheme providing health cover of 500,000 INR (about USD 6,800) per family per year. It provides financial support for secondary and tertiary care hospitalization expenses to about 500 million of India’s poorest households through various insurance models with care delivered by public and private empanelled providers. This study undertook to describe the provider empanelment of PM-JAY, a key element of its functioning and determinant of its impact. Methods We carried out secondary analysis of cross-sectional administrative program data publicly available in PM-JAY portal for 30 Indian states and 06 UTs. We analysed the state wise distribution, type and sector of empanelled hospitals and services offered through PM-JAY scheme across all the states and UTs. Results We found that out of the total facilities empanelled (N = 20,257) under the scheme in 2020, more than half (N = 11,367, 56%) were in the public sector, while 8,157 (40%) facilities were private for profit, and 733 (4%) were private not for profit entities. State wise distribution of hospitals showed that five states (Karnataka (N = 2,996, 14.9%), Gujarat (N = 2,672, 13.3%), Uttar Pradesh (N = 2,627, 13%), Tamil Nadu (N = 2315, 11.5%) and Rajasthan (N = 2,093 facilities, 10.4%) contributed to more than 60% of empanelled PMJAY facilities: We also observed that 40% of facilities were offering between two and five specialties while 14% of empanelled hospitals provided 21–24 specialties. Conclusion A majority of the hospital empanelled under the scheme are in states with previous experience of implementing publicly funded health insurance schemes, with the exception of Uttar Pradesh. Reasons underlying these patterns of empanelment as well as the impact of empanelment on service access, utilisation, population health and financial risk protection warrant further study. While the inclusion and regulation of the private sector is a goal that may be served by empanelment, the role of public sector remains critical, particularly in underserved areas of India.

Background Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) are among India’s top burdens, particularly in states like Kerala, which is at an advanced stage of the epidemiological transition. Evidence in India points towards intersectional inequalities in risk factors of NCDs and testing, both of which are understudied in Kerala. We estimated the self-reported testing and prevalence of key NCD risk factors—blood pressure (BP) and blood glucose (BG) comparing Kerala men and women across educational, wealth, religion, as well as caste and tribal status subgroups. Method A multistage random sample survey of 3398 women and 2982 men aged 30 years and over was administered in 4 districts of Kerala from July to October 2019. Descriptive analysis for men and women was undertaken using survey weights. Slope index of Inequality and Relative Concentration Index for wealth and education related inequalities, and, Weighted Mean Difference from Mean and Index of Disparity for caste and tribal status, as well as religion related inequalities were calculated using World Health Organisation’s Health Equity Assessment Toolkit Plus and Stata 12. Results A significantly higher proportion of women reported BP and BG testing by medical personnel in the previous year than men (BP Testing among Women (BPTw): 90.3% vs BP Testing among Men (BPTM):80.8%, BG Testing among Women (BGTw): 86.2% vs BG Testing among Women (BGTM):78.3%). Among those tested, more women (11.2%) than men (7.9%) reported High Blood Pressure (HBP) but not High Blood Glucose (HBG). Testing for BP was concentrated among less-educated women while BG testing was concentrated among both less educated women and men. HBP and HBG were concentrated among less educated and wealthier groups. Although sex differences were insignificant across caste and tribal status and religion subgroups, magnitude of inequalities was high for HBP and HBG. Conclusion Distinct patterns of sex inequalities were present in self-reported testing and prevalence of NCD risk factors in Kerala. Education and wealth seem to be associated with testing while prevalence appeared to vary by religious groups. Given the low rates of illiteracy, it is encouraging but maybe a data artefact that a small population of less-educated persons was getting tested; however, exclusion of poor groups and inequalities by other dimensions raise concerns. Further exploration is needed to understand underlying mechanisms of these inequalities to ensure we leave no one behind.

Objective To develop a primary health-care monitoring framework and health outcome indicator list, and field-test and triangulate indicators designed to assess health reforms in Kerala, India, 2018–2019. Methods We used a modified Delphi technique to develop a 23-item indicator list to monitor primary health care. We used a multistage cluster random sampling technique to select one district from each of four district clusters, and then select both a family and a primary health centre from each of the four districts. We field-tested and triangulated the indicators using facility data and a population-based household survey. Findings Our data revealed similarities between facility and survey data for some indicators (e.g. low birth weight and pre-check services), but differences for others (e.g. acute diarrhoeal diseases in children younger than 5 years and blood pressure screening). We made four critical observations: (i) data are available at the facility level but in varying formats; (ii) established global indicators may not always be useful in local monitoring; (iii) operational definitions must be refined; and (iv) triangulation and feedback from the field is vital. Conclusion We observe that, while data can be used to develop indices of progress, interpretation of these indicators requires great care. In the attainment of universal health coverage, we consider that our observations of the utility of certain health indicators will provide valuable insights for practitioners and supervisors in the development of a primary health-care monitoring mechanism.

Background Among the core principles of the 2030 agenda of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the call to Leave no One behind (LNOB), a principle that gained resonance as the world contended with the COVID-19 pandemic. The south Indian state of Kerala received acclaim globally for its efforts in managing COVID-19 pandemic. Less attention has been paid, however, to how inclusive this management was, as well as if and how those “left behind” in testing, care, treatment, and vaccination efforts were identified and catered to. Filling this gap was the aim of our study. Methods We conducted In-depth interviews with 80 participants from four districts of Kerala from July to October 2021. Participants included elected local self-government members, medical and public health staff, as well as community leaders. Following written informed consent procedures, each interviewee was asked questions about whom they considered the most “vulnerable” in their areas. They were also asked if there were any special programmes/schemes to support the access of “vulnerable” groups to general and COVID related health services, as well as other needs. Recordings were transliterated into English and analysed thematically by a team of researchers using ATLAS.ti 9.1 software. Results The age range of participants was between 35 and 60 years. Vulnerability was described differentially by geography and economic context; for e.g., fisherfolk were identified in coastal areas while migrant labourers were considered as vulnerable in semi-urban areas. In the context of COVID-19, some participants reflected that everyone was vulnerable. In most cases, vulnerable groups were already beneficiaries of various government schemes within and beyond the health sector. During COVID, the government prioritized access to COVID-19 testing and vaccination among marginalized population groups like palliative care patients, the elderly, migrant labourers, as well as Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes communities. Livelihood support like food kits, community kitchen, and patient transportation were provided by the LSGs to support these groups. This involved coordination between health and other departments, which may be formalised, streamlined and optimised in the future. Conclusion Health system actors and local self-government members were aware of vulnerable populations prioritized under various schemes but did not describe vulnerable groups beyond this. Emphasis was placed on the broad range of services made available to these “left behind” groups through interdepartmental and multi-stakeholder collaboration. Further study (currently underway) may offer insights into how these communities – identified as vulnerable – perceive themselves, and whether/how they receive, and experience schemes designed for them. At the program level, inclusive and innovative identification and recruitment mechanisms need to be devised to identify populations who are currently left behind but may still be invisible to system actors and leaders.

Background In 2016, the Government of the southern Indian state of Kerala launched the Aardram mission, a set of reforms in the state’s health sector with the support of Local Self Governments (LSG). Primary Health Centres (PHCs) were slated for transformation into Family Health Centres (FHCs), with extended hours of operation as well as improved quality and range of services. With the COVID-19 pandemic emerging soon after their introduction, we studied the outcomes of the transformation from PHC to FHC and how they related to primary healthcare service delivery during COVID-19. Methods A qualitative study was conducted using In-depth interviews with 80 health system actors (male n = 32, female n = 48) aged between 30–63 years in eight primary care facilities of four districts in Kerala from July to October 2021. Participants included LSG members, medical and public health staff, as well as community leaders. Questions about the need for primary healthcare reforms, their implementation, challenges, achievements, and the impact of COVID-19 on service delivery were asked. Written informed consent was obtained and interview transcripts – transliterated into English—were thematically analysed by a team of four researchers using ATLAS.ti 9 software. Results LSG members and health staff felt that the PHC was an institution that guarantees preventive, promotive, and curative care to the poorest section of society and can help in reducing the high cost of care. Post-transformation to FHCs, improved timings, additional human resources, new services, fully functioning laboratories, and well stocked pharmacies were observed and linked to improved service utilization and reduced cost of care. Challenges of geographical access remained, along with concerns about the lack of attention to public health functions, and sustainability in low-revenue LSGs. COVID-19 pandemic restrictions disrupted promotive services, awareness sessions and outreach activities; newly introduced services were stopped, and outpatient numbers were reduced drastically. Essential health delivery and COVID-19 management increased the workload of health workers and LSG members, as the emphasis was placed on managing the COVID-19 pandemic and delivering essential health services. Conclusion Most of the health system actors expressed their belief in and commitment to primary health care reforms and noted positive impacts on the clinical side with remaining challenges of access, outreach, and sustainability. COVID-19 reduced service coverage and utilisation, but motivated greater efforts on the part of both health workers and community representatives. Primary health care is a shared priority now, with a need for greater focus on systems strengthening, collaboration, and primary prevention.

Background Kerala, a south Indian state, has a long and strong history of mobilisation of people’s participation with institutionalised mechanisms as part of decentralisation reforms introduced three decades ago. This history formed the backdrop of the state’s COVID-19 response from 2020 onwards. As part of a larger health equity study, we carried out an analysis to understand the contributions of people’s participation to the state’s COVID-19 response, and what implications this may have for health reform as well as governance more broadly. Methods We employed in-depth interviews with participants from four districts of Kerala between July and October, 2021. Following written informed consent procedures, we carried out interviews of health staff from eight primary health care centres, elected Local Self Government (LSG, or Panchayat) representatives, and community leaders. Questions explored primary health care reforms, COVID responses, and populations left behind. Transliterated English transcripts were analysed by four research team members using a thematic analysis approach and ATLAS.ti 9 software. For this paper, we specifically analysed codes and themes related to experiences of community actors and processes for COVID mitigation activities. Results A key feature of the COVID-19 response was the formation of Rapid Response Teams (RRTs), groups of lay community volunteers, who were identified and convened by LSG leaders. In some cases, pre-pandemic ‘Arogya sena’ (health army) community volunteer groups were merged with RRTs. RRT members were trained and supported by the health departments at the local level to distribute medicine and essential items, provided support for transportation to health facilities, and assisted with funerary rites during lockdown and containment period. RRTs often comprised youth cadres of ruling and opposition political parties. Existing community networks like Kudumbashree (Self Help Groups) and field workers from other departments have supported and been supported by RRTs. As pandemic restrictions eased, however, there was concern about the sustainability of this arrangement as well. Conclusion Participatory local governance in Kerala allowed for the creation of invited spaces for community participation in a variety of roles as part of the COVID 19 response, with manifest impact. However, the terms of engagement were not decided by communities, nor were they involved more deeply in planning and organising health policy or services. The sustainability and governance features of such involvement warrant further study.