Abstract
Introduction Globally, resources for health spending, including HIV and tuberculosis (TB), are constrained, and a substantial gap exists between spending and estimated needs. Optima is an allocative efficiency modelling tool that has been used since 2010 in over 50 settings to generate evidence for country-level HIV and TB resource allocation decisions. This evaluation sought to assess the determinants and outcomes of using modelling to inform financing priorities from the perspective of country stakeholders and their international partners.
Methods In October-December 2021, the World Bank and Burnet Institute led 16 small-group virtual interviews with representatives from national governments and international health and funding organizations. Interviewed stakeholders represented nine countries and 11 different disease program country contexts where Optima modelling work had been undertaken. Interview notes were thematically analyzed to evaluate determinants of research translation into policy and practice.
Results Common factors that facilitated or inhibited the application of Optima findings broadly encompassed the perceived validity of findings, health system financing mechanisms, the extent of stakeholder participation, engagement of funding organization, socio-political context, and whether the analysis was timed to suit data and stakeholder needs. Key reported outcomes of Optima analyses related to improved understanding of data and allocative efficiency, support for strategic planning, financial planning, funding advocacy and grant proposals, and influencing investment shifts between interventions or their delivery modalities.
Conclusion Allocative efficiency modeling has supported evidence-informed decision making in numerous contexts and enhanced the conceptual and practical understanding of allocative efficiency. Most immediately, greater involvement of country stakeholders in modelling studies and tying the timing of such studies to key strategic and financial planning decisions may increase the impact on decision making. To further improve relevance and acceptance of modelling findings, there needs to be greater consideration given to integrated disease modelling, equity goals, and financing constraints.
What is already known on this topic Mathematical modelling is widely used in health planning and policy, including to support understanding of HIV epidemics at national and global levels. Allocative efficiency modelling tools such as Optima are used to consider the most cost-effective distribution of resources to maximise specified health gains. Despite the widespread application of modelling tools, there are limited examples of groups evaluating the translation and adoption of model findings into policy and financing decisions. The available literature prescribes stakeholder engagement as one of the key principles for effective modelling, thus assessing the acceptability and application of modelling implementation with key stakeholders may provide important insight into means to improve the uptake and impact of modelling evidence.
What this study adds This evaluation of prior Optima HIV and TB modelling is one of few studies that explores factors influencing the translation of modelling results into policy and practice, with a focus on health financing priorities. Our findings demonstrate that allocative efficiency modeling has supported evidence-informed decision making in numerous contexts, enhanced the conceptual and practical understanding of allocative efficiency and supported constructive dialogue on the data and evidence. We found that key facilitators of translating findings into policy include timing of analyses prior to key strategic and financial planning exercises, confidence in the input data, involvement of diverse stakeholders early and throughout the modelling process, flexible financing mechanisms, and familiarity and understanding of the model.
How this study might affect research, practice or policy These findings highlight opportunities to strengthen the local value, acceptance and utility of such analyses for better prioritized spending and ultimately to contribute to improved health outcomes. These findings have relevance to diverse modelling groups to technically support health program and financial planning in international contexts. It provides an overview of facilitators and barriers that can assist teams in conducting more effective and relevant modelling studies for policy makers and other stakeholders. Resulting improvements to processes may help to increase stakeholders’ satisfaction with the modelling processes and acceptance of findings, improve the efficiency and use of stakeholders’ time, promote increased local ownership of findings, and lead to greater opportunities for developing local capacity in contributing to the modelling processes. Ultimately, these findings may support modelling groups, sponsors, and stakeholders to collaborate, implement and apply modelling effectively to decision making for health spending and strategies.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by the World Bank, who contributed to study design, implementation, analysis, interpretation and manuscript review. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution to this work of the Victorian Operational Infrastructure Support Program received by the Burnet Institute.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The original QA exercise was not subject to ethics review. The Alfred Hospital Ethics Review Committee approved the collation and analysis of the program QA data (project number:158/22).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data from this evaluation is not available for sharing as per ethics agreements. Data and reports for underlying country models are published and openly available in the World Bank Open Knowledge Repository and through Optima.
