Stakeholders beyond the health sector will often need to lead, which is challenging because the concept of primary health care is poorly understood by other sectors. Efforts on primary health care as policy and implementation space might focus explicitly on primary care and the frontline of service delivery with clear links and support to complementary work on social determinants and building healthy societies. Such efforts can be partial but important implementation solutions to contribute to the much bigger political vision of primary health care.We examine the potential and limitations of primary health care in contributing to the achievement of the health-related sustainable development goals (SDGs), and recommend policies to enable a functioning primary health-care system. Governments have recently reaffirmed their commitment to the SDGs through the 2018 Declaration of Astana, which redefines the three functions of primary health care as service provision, multisectoral actions and the empowerment of citizens. In other words, the health-related SDGs cannot be achieved by the provision of health-care services alone. Some health issues are related to environment, necessitating joint efforts between local, national and international partners; other issues require public awareness (health literacy) of preventable illnesses. However, the provision of primary health care, and hence achievement of the SDGs, is hampered by several issues. First, inadequate government spending on health is exacerbated by the small proportions allocated to primary health care. Second, the shortage and maldistribution of the health workforce, and chronic absenteeism in some countries, has led to a situation in which staffing levels are inversely related to poverty and need. Third, the health workforce is not trained in multisectoral actions, and already experiences workloads of an overwhelming nature. Finally, health illiteracy is common among the population, even in developed countries. We recommend that governments increase spending on health and primary health care, implement interventions to retain the rural health workforce, and update the pre-service training curricula of personnel to include skills in multisectoral collaboration and enhanced community engagement.Primary health care offers a cost-effective route to achieving universal health coverage (UHC). However, primary health-care systems are weak in many low- and middle-income countries and often fail to provide comprehensive, people-centred, integrated care. We analysed the primary health-care systems in 20 low- and middle-income countries using a semi-grounded approach. Options for strengthening primary health-care systems were identified by thematic content analysis. We found that (i) despite the growing burden of noncommunicable disease, many low- and middle-income countries lacked funds for preventive services; (ii) community health workers were often under-resourced, poorly supported and lacked training; (iii) out-of-pocket expenditure exceeded 40% of total health expenditure in half the countries studied, which affected equity; and (iv) health insurance schemes were hampered by the fragmentation of public and private systems, underfunding, corruption and poor engagement of informal workers. In 14 countries, the private sector was largely unregulated. Moreover, community engagement in primary health care was weak in countries where services were largely privatized. In some countries, decentralization led to the fragmentation of primary health care. Performance improved when financial incentives were linked to regulation and quality improvement, and community involvement was strong. Policy-making should be supported by adequate resources for primary health-care implementation and government spending on primary health care should be increased by at least 1% of gross domestic product. Devising equity-enhancing financing schemes and improving the accountability of primary health-care management is also needed. Support from primary health-care systems is critical for progress towards UHC in the decade to 2030.Universal health coverage (UHC) depends on a strong primary health-care system. To be successful, primary health care must be expanded at community and household levels as much of the world's population still lacks access to health facilities for basic services. Abundant evidence shows that community-based interventions are effective for improving health-care utilization and outcomes when integrated with facility-based services. Community involvement is the cornerstone of local, equitable and integrated primary health care. Policies and actions to improve primary health care must regard community members as more than passive recipients of health care. Instead, they should be leaders with a substantive role in planning, decision-making, implementation and evaluation. Advancing the science of primary health care requires improved conceptual and analytical frameworks and research questions. Metrics used for evaluating primary health care and UHC largely focus on clinical health outcomes and the inputs and activities for achieving them. Little attention is paid to indicators of equitable coverage or measures of overall well-being, ownership, control or priority-setting, or to the extent to which communities have agency. In the future, communities must become more involved in evaluating the success of efforts to expand primary health care. Much of primary health care has taken place, and will continue to take place, outside health facilities. Involving community members in decisions about health priorities and in community-based service delivery is key to improving systems that promote access to care. https://www.selleckchem.com/products/syrosingopine-su-3118.html Neither UHC nor the Health for All movement will be achieved without the substantial contribution of communities.Primary health care provides the framework for delivering the socially-informed, comprehensive and patient-centred care underlying robust health-care systems and is, therefore, central to achieving universal health coverage. Family physicians are best placed to embody primary health care's dual focus on community and population health because they are often employed in rural or district hospitals with limited human resources, particularly a lack of specialists. Here we want to illustrate how additional training for family physicians, the key clinicians in primary care, can play a critical role in reducing disparities in access to surgical, obstetric and anaesthesia care in low- and middle-income countries and in rural or remote settings. Examples are given of how training programmes can be developed in low-resource settings to equip family physicians with life-saving surgical skills and of how family physicians in high-income countries can be trained in the surgical skills essential for working overseas in low-income settings. Policy-makers should promote surgical practice among family physicians by supporting family medicine programmes that include additional surgical skills training and by expanding opportunities and incentives for family physicians to serve in rural areas. Moreover, national surgical plans should include a primary health care strategy for surgical care and, globally, family physicians should be considered in discussions of surgical care. Finally, surgeons, anaesthesiologists, obstetricians and family physicians should be encouraged to collaborate in ensuring that all patients, regardless of place of residence, receive safe and timely surgical care.
To explore how primary care organizations assess and subsequently act upon the social determinants of noncommunicable diseases in their local populations.

For this systematic review we searched the online databases of PubMed®, MEDLINE®, Embase® and the Health Management Information Consortium from inception to 28 June 2019, along with hand-searching of references. Studies of any design that examined a primary care organization assessing social determinants of noncommunicable diseases were included. For quality assessment we used Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions. We used narrative data synthesis to appraise the extent to which the assessments gathered data on the domains of the World Health Organization social determinants of health framework.

We identified 666 studies of which 17 were included in the review. All studies used descriptive study designs. Clinic-based and household surveys and interviews were more commonly used to assess local social deteence is needed to ascertain whether measuring social determinants leads to interventions which mitigate unmet social needs and reduce health disparities.
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.

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.

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 5years 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.

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.
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.
To estimate the use of hospitals for four essential primary care services offered in health centres in low- and middle-income countries and to explore differences in quality between hospitals and health centres.

We extracted data from all demographic and health surveys conducted since 2010 on the type of facilities used for obtaining contraceptives, routine antenatal care and care for minor childhood diarrhoea and cough or fever. Using mixed-effects logistic regression models we assessed associations between hospital use and individual and country-level covariates. We assessed competence of care based on the receipt of essential clinical actions during visits. We also analysed three indicators of user experience from countries with available service provision assessment survey data.

On average across 56 countries, public hospitals were used as the sole source of care by 16.9% of 126 012 women who obtained contraceptives, 23.1% of 418 236 women who received routine antenatal care, 19.9% of 47 677 children with diarrhoea and 18.