Lancet
-
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are now steering the global health and development agendas. Notably, the SDGs contain no mention of primary health care, reflecting the disappointing implementation of the Alma-Ata declaration of 1978 over the past four decades. ⋯ We use accumulating evidence to show that countries that reoriente their health systems towards primary care are better placed to achieve the SDGs than those with hospital-focused systems or low investment in health. We then argue that an even bolder approach, which fully embraces the Alma-Ata vision of primary health care, could deliver substantially greater SDG progress, by addressing the wider determinants of health, promoting equity and social justice throughout society, empowering communities, and being a catalyst for advancing and amplifying universal health coverage and synergies among SDGs.
-
Weakness of primary health-care (PHC) systems has represented a challenge to the achievement of the targets of disease control programmes (DCPs) despite the availability of substantial development assistance for health, in resource-poor settings. Since 2005, Ethiopia has embraced a diagonal investment approach to strengthen its PHC systems and concurrently scale up DCPs. This approach has led to a substantial improvement in PHC-system capacity that has contributed to increased coverage of DCPs and improved health status, although gaps in equity and quality in health services remain to be addressed. ⋯ We argue that the diagonal investment approach can effectively strengthen PHC systems, achieve DCP targets, and sustain the gains. These goals can be achieved if a visionary and committed leadership coordinates its development partners and mobilises the local community, to ensure financial support to health services and improve population health. The lessons learnt from Ethiopia's efforts to improve its health services indicate that global-health initiatives should have a proactive and balanced investment approach to concurrently strengthen PHC systems, achieve programme targets, and sustain the gains, in resource-poor settings.
-
In this Series paper, we describe the frequency of, trends in, determinants of, and inequalities in caesarean section (CS) use, globally, regionally, and in selected countries. On the basis of data from 169 countries that include 98·4% of the world's births, we estimate that 29·7 million (21·1%, 95% uncertainty interval 19·9-22·4) births occurred through CS in 2015, which was almost double the number of births by this method in 2000 (16·0 million [12·1%, 10·9-13·3] births). CS use in 2015 was up to ten times more frequent in the Latin America and Caribbean region, where it was used in 44·3% (41·3-47·4) of births, than in the west and central Africa region, where it was used in 4·1% (3·6-4·6) of births. ⋯ Based on the most recent data available for each country, 15% of births in 106 (63%) of 169 countries were by CS, whereas 47 (28%) countries showed CS use in less than 10% of births. National CS use varied from 0·6% in South Sudan to 58·1% in the Dominican Republic. Within-country disparities in CS use were also very large: CS use was almost five times more frequent in births in the richest versus the poorest quintiles in low-income and middle-income countries; markedly high CS use was observed among low obstetric risk births, especially among more educated women in, for example, Brazil and China; and CS use was 1·6 times more frequent in private facilities than in public facilities.