Priority setting in a context of insecurity, epidemiological transition and low financial risk protection, Afghanistan

Protecting essential health services in low-income and middle-income countries and humanitarian settings while responding to the COVID-19 pandemic

“…The selected 120 essential health interventions that should be unconditionally protected and delivered despite the disruptions caused by COVID-19 were extracted from the highest priority package (HPP) for universal health coverage (UHC) developed by the DCP project. The HPP list of interventions was used as a starting point for discussions and adaptation together with national policy-makers in Afghanistan, 8 Ethiopia, Pakistan and Zanzibar. All invited policy-makers in each of these countries had past experience with translating the evidence from the original list of HPP interventions into national health benefit packages, providing an important source of information from diverse contexts.…”

Calculating the Cost and Financing Needs of the Basic Package of Health Services in Afghanistan: Methods, Experiences, and Results

“…Before the change of government in 2021, the results of the 2018 BPHS costing were used by the MOPH to advocate for additional funding for the BPHS; to identify cost per service for a national Pay for Performance scheme; to estimate disease costs for national health accounts; to use in actuarial analysis for planning the introduction of health 22 The unit costs derived during the earlier 2016 BPHS costing were used in a study to estimate the costs and impact of scaling up services and in a study on priority setting. 23,24 The results have also been used after the Taliban took over the government. The BPHS is still the accepted package for PHC and, since November 2021, donor-funded procurement of these services has been managed by the World Health Organization and UNICEF.…”

“…22 The unit costs derived during the earlier 2016 BPHS costing were used in a study to estimate the costs and impact of scaling up services and in a study on priority setting. 23 , 24 …”

Country readiness and prerequisites for successful design and transition to implementation of essential packages of health services: experience from six countries

“…Many countries designed EPHS before setting UHC as a global commitment in 2015,25 29 30 but not all were implemented. Some packages were defined by countries in fragile situations and chronic crises, sometimes with the support and engagement of development agencies and donors, such as in Afghanistan,7 northern Syria,31 Somalia32 and Yemen 33. In some of these countries, the package aimed to identify a minimum set of essential services for emergency funding or for contracting with the private sector or non-governmental organisations to provide primary care services.…”

“…Since their launch in December 2017, the DCP3 evidence and packages have been used by several countries to design or revise their national EPHS 7–10. The experience of six LLMICs has recently been reviewed by a knowledge network of professionals engaged in DCP3-related country work to extract lessons learnt and update evidence and good practice.…”