Browsing by Author "Amin, Mutamad"
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
- ItemInclusion and human rights in health policies : comparative and benchmarking analysis of 51 policies from Malawi, Sudan, South Africa and Namibia(Public Library of Science, 2012-05-23) MacLachlan, Malcolm; Amin, Mutamad; Mannan, Hasheem; El Tayeb, Shahla; Bedri, Nafisa; Swartz, Leslie; Munthali, Alister; Van Rooy, Gert; McVeigh, JoanneWhile many health services strive to be equitable, accessible and inclusive, peoples' right to health often goes unrealized, particularly among vulnerable groups. The extent to which health policies explicitly seek to achieve such goals sets the policy context in which services are delivered and evaluated. An analytical framework was developed - EquiFrame - to evaluate 1) the extent to which 21 Core Concepts of human rights were addressed in policy documents, and 2) coverage of 12 Vulnerable Groups who might benefit from such policies. Using this framework, analysis of 51 policies across Malawi, Namibia, South Africa and Sudan, confirmed the relevance of all Core Concepts and Vulnerable Groups. Further, our analysis highlighted some very strong policies, serious shortcomings in others as well as country-specific patterns. If social inclusion and human rights do not underpin policy formation, it is unlikely they will be inculcated in service delivery. EquiFrame facilitates policy analysis and benchmarking, and provides a means for evaluating policy revision and development. © 2012 MacLachlan et al.
- ItemInclusion of vulnerable groups in health policies : regional policies on health priorities in Africa(AOSIS Publishing, 2013-01) Schneider, Margie; Eide, Arne Henning; Amin, Mutamad; MacLachlan, Malcom; Mannan, HasheemBackground: If access to equitable health care is to be achieved for all, policy documents must mention and address in some detail different needs of groups vulnerable to not accessing such health care. If these needs are not addressed in the policy documents, there is little chance that they will be addressed at the stage of implementation. Objectives: This paper reports on an analysis of 11 African Union (AU) policy documents to ascertain the frequency and the extent of mention of 13 core concepts in relation to 12 vulnerable groups, with a specific focus on people with disabilities. Method: The paper applied the EquiFrame analytical framework to the 11 AU policy documents. The 11 documents were analysed in terms of how many times a core concept was mentioned and the extent of information on how the core concept should be addressed at the implementation level. Each core concept mention was further analysed in terms of the vulnerable group in referred to. Results: The analysis of regional AU policies highlighted the broad nature of the reference made to vulnerable groups, with a lack of detailed specifications of different needs of different groups. This is confirmed in the highest vulnerable group mention being for ‘universal’. The reading of the documents suggests that vulnerable groups are homogeneous in their needs, which is not the case. There is a lack of recognition of different needs of different vulnerable groups in accessing health care. Conclusion: The need for more information and knowledge on the needs of all vulnerable groups is evident. The current lack of mention and of any detail on how to address needs of vulnerable groups will significantly impair the access to equitable health care for all.
- ItemLearning from doing the EquitAble project : content, context, process, and impact of a multi-country research project on vulnerable populations in Africa(AOSIS Publishing, 2014-10) MacLachlan, Mac; Amin, Mutamad; Mji, Gubela; Mannan, Hasheem; McVeigh, Joanne; McAuliffe, Eilish; Amadhila, Elina; Munthali, Alister; Eide, Arne, H.; Kudakwashe Dube, A.Background: The ‘EquitAble’ project carried out content analyses of policies and collected and analysed qualitative and quantitative data concerning access to health services in Sudan, Malawi, Namibia and South Africa. Our particular concern was to address the situation of people with disabilities, although not in isolation from other marginalised or vulnerable groups. Objectives: This article reports on the content, context, process and impact of project EquitAble, funded by the European Commission Seventh Research Framework Programme, which brought together researchers from Ireland, Norway, South Africa, Namibia, Sudan and Malawi. Method: After the 4-year project ended in February 2013, all members of the consortium were asked to anonymously complete a bespoke questionnaire designed by the coordinating team. The purpose of the questionnaire was to capture the views of those who collaborated on the research project in relation to issues of content, context, process and impact of the EquitAble project. Results: Our results indicated some of the successes and challenges encountered by our consortium. Conclusion: We identified contextual and process learning points, factors often not discussed in papers, which typically focus on the reporting of the ‘content’ of results.
- ItemPromoting good policy for leadership and governance of health related rehabilitation : a realist synthesis(BioMed Central, 2016-08-24) McVeigh, Joanne; MacLachlan, Malcolm; Gilmore, Brynne; McClean, Chiedza; Eide, Arne H.; Mannan, Hasheem; Geiser, Priscille; Duttine, Antony; Mji, Gubela; McAuliffe, Eilish; Sprunt, Beth; Amin, Mutamad; Normand, CharlesENGLISH SUMMARY : Good governance may result in strengthened performance of a health system. Coherent policies are essential for good health system governance. The overall aim of this research is to provide the best available scientific evidence on principles of good policy related leadership and governance of health related rehabilitation services in less resourced settings. This research was also conducted to support development of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Guidelines on health related rehabilitation. Methods: An innovative study design was used, comprising two methods: a systematic search and realist synthesis of literature, and a Delphi survey of expert stakeholders to refine and triangulate findings from the realist synthesis. In accordance with Pawson and Tilley’s approach to realist synthesis, we identified context mechanism outcome pattern configurations (CMOCs) from the literature. Subsequently, these CMOCs were developed into statements for the Delphi survey, whereby 18 expert stakeholders refined these statements to achieve consensus on recommendations for policy related governance of health related rehabilitation. Results: Several broad principles emerged throughout formulation of recommendations: participation of persons with disabilities in policy processes to improve programme responsiveness, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability, and to strengthen service-user self-determination and satisfaction; collection of disaggregated disability statistics to support political momentum, decision-making of policymakers, evaluation, accountability, and equitable allocation of resources; explicit promotion in policies of access to services for all subgroups of persons with disabilities and service-users to support equitable and accessible services; robust inter-sectoral coordination to cultivate coherent mandates across governmental departments regarding service provision; and ‘institutionalizing’ programmes by aligning them with preexisting Ministerial models of healthcare to support programme sustainability. Conclusions: Alongside national policymakers, our policy recommendations are relevant for several stakeholders, including service providers and service-users. This research aims to provide broad policy recommendations, rather than a strict formula, in acknowledgement of contextual diversity and complexity. Accordingly, our study proposes general principles regarding optimal policy related governance of health related rehabilitation in less resourced settings, which may be valuable across diverse health systems and contexts.