Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background: Vaccine effectiveness studies provide evidence on the effects of vaccines for preventing disease and the adverse outcomes following a vaccination rollout programme in a country or a specific population. Aims: To document the technical and capacity-building support provided by WHO to countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region to conduct COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness studies. Methods: WHO implemented interventions to enhance the capacity of EMR countries to conduct COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and similar epidemiological studies. The intervention consisted of several components, including methodological and technical support as well as data and project management at national and regional levels. Two WHO generic protocols were adopted: cohort study among healthcare workers and test-negative design in severe acute respiratory infections surveillance sites. Results: Egypt, Islamic Republic of Iran, Jordan, and Pakistan participated in the programme. The research protocols were adjusted to country context and settings. WHO provided technical, financial and infrastructure support, including the establishment of quality assessment approaches, study conduct, data management, report development, statistical data analysis, and experience-sharing between the countries. Technical capacity-building was also offered to other countries not involved in the vaccine effectiveness studies. Conclusion: COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to enhance the research capacities of EMR countries for the conduct of vaccine effectiveness studies. The WHO consolidated efforts and its collaboration with countries resulted in enhancement of capacity and research infrastructure, especially in the 4 countries that were supported by this programme. The capacities acquired through the programme would be very useful for other vaccine-preventable communicable diseases, thus better informing national immunization programmes and policies in EMR countries

Objectives To evaluate the effects of rural health insurance and family physician reforms on hospitalization rates in Iran. Methods An interrupted time series analysis of national monthly hospitalization rates in Iran (2003–2014), starting from two years before the intervention. Segmented regression analysis was used to assess the effects of the reforms on hospitalization rates. Results The analyses showed that hospitalization rates increased one year after the initiation of the reforms: 1.55 (95% CI: 1.24–1.86) additional hospitalizations per 1000 rural inhabitants per month (‘immediate effect’). This increase was followed by a further gradual increase of 0.034 per 1000 inhabitants per month (95% CI: 0.02–0.04). The gradual monthly increase continued for two years after the reforms. The higher hospitalization rates were maintained in the following years. We observed a significant increase in hospitalization rates at a national level in rural areas that continued for over 10 years after the policy implementation. Conclusion Primary health care reforms are often proposed for their efficiency outcomes (i.e. reduction in costs and use of hospitals) as well as their impact on improving health outcomes. We demonstrated that in populations with unmet needs, such reforms are likely to substantially increase hospitalization rates. This is an important consideration for successful design and implementation of interventions aimed at achieving universal health coverage in low- and middle-income countries.

Keywords: evidence, policy-making, health systems, research, data, EVIPNet The COVID-19 pandemic caused unprecedented misery and death across the globe (1), highlighting the importance of reliable health information systems and local research data and evidence to guide policies (2-4). [...]there is a growing recognition of the importance of the broader evidence system and its diverse actors in shaping decision-making at country level. [...]enhancing the use of data and research evidence in health policies requires addressing the rapid growth of misinformation (the infodemic), and eliminating poor practices in research, which together have contributed to the erosion of trust in health systems and in governments in general (13).

Background Knowledge translation platforms (KTP) are partnerships comprising policy-makers, national researchers, and civil society, serving as organizational knowledge brokers to foster the use and uptake of evidence in evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) processes. Recent evidence suggested that KTP institutionalization requires leadership, commitment, political engagement, shared ownership, monitoring and evaluation, participatory approaches and multi-institutional collaboration within a policy-stable context. However, limited evidence from the Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR) has confirmed, disconfirmed or refuted these theoretical assumptions. In this review, we set out to refine, confirm or disconfirm these theoretical assumptions and explore the barriers and facilitators to institutionalizing and sustaining (KTPs) in the EMR. Methods We followed the scoping review methodological guidance. We searched three databases (Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed) for articles published in French, English or Arabic addressing knowledge translation platforms (KTP) in healthcare in countries from the Eastern Mediterranean region published between 2010 and 2022. Results A total of 55 studies were included out of 2585. Most studies reported KTP initiatives from Pakistan ( n  = 11), Iran ( n  = 9), Jordan ( n  = 8), Lebanon ( n  = 9) and Egypt ( n  = 16), whilst North African countries were underrepresented. Review findings suggest that stakeholder, community engagement and political commitment are key underlying social mechanisms for translating evidence into action. Our review highlights contextual barriers such as rigid hierarchical structures, inadequate protected research time, delayed financial disbursements and cultural resistance to evidence use. Conclusions Researchers might explore the political and structural barriers, such as overarching political forces, and the sensitivity of research findings that impede the uptake of evidence into policy in the region. Our findings underscore the need for multilayered interventions to address these challenges and support the need for systemic capacity-building interventions to promote the institutionalization of KTPs in the Eastern Mediterranean region.

Background: Diabetes imposes an enormous burden on patients, families, societies, and healthcare systems. Determining the affordability of medications is an important complicated and vague task, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to assess the affordability of diabetes medication therapy in Iran’s health system. Methods: This paper presents a scenario-based assessment of the affordability of all registered anti-diabetes medications in Iran in 2017. To this end, 4 medication therapy scenarios were defined as mono, dual, triple, and insulin therapy in accordance with the existing guidelines and clinicians’ opinions. Then the affordability ratio of each treatment scenario was determined for type 1 and type 2 diabetes drawing on the World Health Organization (WHO)/Health Action International (HAI) Methodology. If the affordability ratio for treatment schedules was more than 1, the patients’ out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses exceeded the lowest-paid unskilled government worker (LPGW)’ wage per day, and the treatment was labelled as non-affordable. Results: The results revealed that the mono, dual, and triple (non-insulin) medication therapies in type 2 diabetes were affordable, despite an increase in the dosage or a switch from the monotherapy to the combination therapy of oral medications. However, some treatment scenarios in the triple therapy, including oral plus insulin and some insulin only therapies, were proved to be non-affordable. In type 1 diabetes, only insulin glulisine, detemir, and lispro were non-affordable in monotherapy. Regarding the combination therapy, only isophane insulin with aspart or regular insulin were affordable treatments. Conclusion: Although oral medication therapies were documented to be affordable, insulin therapy, with current coverage conditions, for patients with lowest paid wages and those receiving even less is unaffordable and a major barrier to treatment; hence, policy-maker should consider targeting and more financial protection policies to improve the affordability of insulin therapies among this group of patients.

Background : Evaluating a pharmacovigilance system helps identify its deficiencies and could facilitate measures to remedy and improve the quantity and quality of adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports and other opportunities for pharmacovigilance systems strengthening. This study aimed to evaluate the status of pharmacovigilance in Iran using the World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance indicators with the prospect of identifying the gaps and areas for improvement. Methods : This study was conducted in 2 parts. The first part included a secondary analysis of the national data obtained from the Iranian National Pharmacovigilance Center (PVC) using a structured data collection form based on WHO core pharmacovigilance indicators. In the second part, a 3-month prospective study was carried out to investigate 2 outcome indicators, ie, length of stay and costs of medicine-related hospitalization in all patients of 2 main referral hospitals in the southeast and north of Iran. Results : Iran has a PVC with national policy, trained staff, and a statutory budget. In 2017, the number of ADR reports was 15.0 per 100 000 population, and 262 signals were detected during the preceding 5 years. The average length of stay and costs of medicine-related hospitalization were 5 days and US $817.2 in Afzalipour hospital and 6.6 days and US$ 306.7 in Razi hospital, respectively. The status of pharmacovigilance in the Iranian public health programs (PHPs) is unknown, and most of the indicators could not be assessed. Conclusion : A robust pharmacovigilance system is a pivotal part of the overall medicines regulatory system. The Iranian pharmacovigilance system has relatively the proper structural condition. Though the underreporting of ADRs, especially medicine-related deaths, is an important issue, and some indicators’ status was unclear. The Iranian pharmacovigilance program requires a higher prioritization, particularly in the PHPs, a greater allocation of resources, and cross-sectoral cooperation to bolster and achieve the pharmacovigilance objectives.

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies provide real-world evidence to monitor vaccine performance and inform policy. The WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean supported a regional study to assess the VE of COVID-19 vaccines against different clinical outcomes in four countries between June 2021 and August 2023. Health worker cohort studies were conducted in 2707 health workers in Egypt and Pakistan, of whom 171 experienced symptomatic laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Test-negative design case–control studies were conducted in Iran and Jordan in 4017 severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) patients (2347 controls and 1670 cases) during the Omicron variant dominant period. VE estimates were calculated for each study and pooled by study design for several vaccine types (BBIBP-CorV, AZD1222, BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273, among others). Among health workers, VE against symptomatic infection of a complete primary series could only be computed compared to partial vaccination, suggesting a benefit of providing an additional dose of mRNA vaccines (VE: 88.9%, 95%CI: 15.3–98.6%), while results were inconclusive for other vaccine products. Among SARI patients, VE against hospitalization of a complete primary series with any vaccine compared to non-vaccinated was 20.9% (95%CI: 4.5–34.5%). Effectiveness estimates for individual vaccines, booster doses, and secondary outcomes (intensive care unit admission and death) were inconclusive. Future VE studies will need to address challenges in both design and analysis when conducted late during a pandemic and will be able to utilize the strengthened capacities in countries.

Medication errors are the second most common cause of adverse patient safety incidents and the single most common preventable cause of adverse events in medical practice. Given the high human fatalities and financial burden of medication errors for healthcare systems worldwide, reducing their occurrence is a global priority. Therefore, appropriate policies to reduce medication errors, using national data and valid statistics are required. The primary objective of this study was to provide a national 'characteristic profile' of medication error-associated adverse drug reactions (ADRs), which are also known as preventable ADRs (pADRs). A retrospective study of pADR reports submitted to the national pharmacovigilance center (PCV) within Iran's Food and Drug Administration was conducted over a 2-year period (2015-2017). Preventability Method (P-Method), which is a standardized tool developed and recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), was used for preventability assessment. The results of the analyses revealed that while the number of pADRs increased from year one to two (601 to 630), their proportion out of all ADRs per year decreased (7.32% to 6.44%). The percentage of pADRs was higher in females (61.01%) and adults (83.27%), and the highest number of reports were received by nurses (71.57%). Having 'a documented hypersensitivity to an administered drug or drug class' was the most common preventable factor in both years (61.23% and 54.29% respectively), and 'anti-infectives used systemically' were the medication class which primarily contributed to both serious (53.29%) and non-serious pADRs (39.19%). The specific characteristics of medication errors associated with ADRs from this study, especially the preventable criteria which led to their occurrence, can help devise more specific preventative policies.