Background: Following the change of government in August 2021, the social and economic landscape of Afghanistan deteriorated into an economic and humanitarian crisis. Afghans continue to struggle to access basic healthcare services, making Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in the country a major challenge. The aim of this study was to perform a qualitative investigation into the main access to care challenges in Afghanistan and whether these challenges have been influenced by the recent socio-political developments, by examining the perspectives of health professionals and hospital directors working in the country. Methods: Health professionals working in facilities run by an international non-government organisation, which has maintained continuous operations since 1999 and has become a key health reference point for the population, alongside the public health system, and hospital directors working in government hospitals were recruited to participate in an in-depth qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Results: A total of 43 participants from ten provinces were interviewed in this study. Four issues were identified as critical barriers to achieving UHC in Afghanistan: (1) the lack of quality human resources; (2) the suboptimal management of chronic diseases and trauma; (3) the inaccessibility of necessary health services due to financial hardship; (4) the unequal accessibility of care for different demographic groups. Conclusions: Health professionals and hospital directors shed light on weaknesses in the Afghan health system highlighting chronic issues and issues that have deteriorated as a result of the 2021 socio-political changes. In order to improve access to care, future healthcare system reforms should consider the perspectives of Afghan professionals working in the country, who are in close contact with Afghan patients and communities.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted societies, influencing countries' Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management (H-EDRM) systems. By taking Italy as a case study, this research aimed to investigate the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the changes made to the existing H-EDRM system, with an emphasis on human resources, health service delivery, and logistics and the forward-looking strategies for the next health emergencies and disasters.Methods: We performed a retrospective observational case study using qualitative methodology. Data was collected via semi-structured interviews and analyzed considering the World Health Organization (WHO) H-EDRM framework. Multiple interviewees were selected to obtain a holistic perspective on the Italian response to COVID-19. Stakeholders from five different sectors (policy-making, hospital, primary care, third sector, lay community) from three of the most impacted Italian regions (Piemonte, Lombardia, and Veneto) were interviewed, for a total of 15 respondents.Results: Results on human resources revolved around the following main themes: personnel, training, occupational health, and multidisciplinary work; results on health service delivery encompassed the following main themes: public health, hospital, and primary care systems; results on logistics dealt with the following themes: infrastructures, supplies, transports, and communication channels. Lessons learned stressed on the importance of considering pragmatic disaster preparedness strategies and the need for cultural and structural reforms. Stakeholders mentioned several implications for the post-pandemic H-EDRM system in Italy.Conclusions: Findings highlight that the interconnection of sectors is key in overcoming pandemic-related challenges and for future disaster preparedness. The implications for the Italian H-EDRM system can inform advancements in disaster management in Italy and beyond.

The Hospital Safety Index is a tool developed by the World Health Organization and the Pan American Health Organization in 2008 and updated in 2015. Although it is the most widely used instrument of its kind to assess the level of hospital preparedness, scientific literature on its application in real life is scarce. This study aimed to investigate the use of the Hospital Safety Index to assess disaster preparedness in healthcare facilities. A retrospective, qualitative study employing semi-structured online interviews was conducted to gather the opinions and perspectives of professionals who have experience in applying the Hospital Safety Index. Authors of scientific publications using the Hospital Safety Index were recruited. A semi-structured interview guide was developed. It addressed different phases of data collection with the Hospital Safety Index, the challenges and facilitators of using it, and recommendations for future adaptations. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Nine participants who were from three countries (Serbia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia) and had different professional backgrounds (medical doctors, engineers, spatial planners, etc.) participated in this study. A total of 5 themes and 15 subthemes emerged during data analysis. Most of the participants reported their reasons for choosing the Hospital Safety Index as being its comprehensiveness and the fact that it was issued by the World Health Organization. The tool appears to be very specific and allows investigators to spot details in hospitals; however, it is not easy to use, and training is highly encouraged to learn how to navigate the different components of the tool. Governmental support is a crucial facilitator for investigators to be able to enter hospitals and conduct their evaluations. Overall, the tool has a lot of potential, and it should be used to reach a broader audience, such as community members, and assess the preparedness of other facilities that can take part in the response to disasters (hotels, stadiums, schools, etc.). Nevertheless, it still needs more adaptations to be tailored to different contexts and settings.

Aim: The aim of this paper is to outline the steps taken to develop an operational checklist to assess primary healthcare (PHC) all-hazards disaster preparedness. It then describes a study testing the applicability of the checklist. Background: A PHC approach is an essential foundation for health emergency and disaster risk management (H-EDRM) because it can prevent and mitigate risks prior to disasters and support an effective response and recovery, thereby contributing to communities’ and countries’ resilience across the continuum of the disaster cycle. This approach is in line with the H-EDRM framework, published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2019, which emphasizes a whole-of-health system approach in disaster management and highlights the importance of integrating PHC into countries’ H-EDRM. Nevertheless, literature focusing on how to practically integrate PHC into disaster management, both at the facility and at the policy level, is in its infancy. As of yet, there is no standardized, validated way to assess the specific characteristics that render PHC prepared for disasters nor a method to evaluate its role in H-EDRM. Methods: The checklist was developed through an iterative process that leveraged academic literature and expert consultations at different stages of the elaboration process. It was then used to assess primary care facilities in a province in Italy. Findings: The checklist offers a practical instrument for assessing and enhancing PHC disaster preparedness and for improving planning, coordination, and funding allocation. The study identified three critical areas for improvement in the province’s PHC disaster preparedness. First, primary care teams should be more interdisciplinary. Second, primary care services should be more thoroughly integrated into the broader health system. Third, there is a notable lack of awareness of H-EDRM principles among PHC professionals. In the future, the checklist can be elaborated into a weighted tool to be more broadly applicable.

Ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) are health conditions for which appropriate primary care intervention could prevent hospital admission. ACSC hospitalization rates are a well-established parameter for assessing the performance of primary health care (PHC). Although this indicator has been extensively used to monitor the performance of PHC systems in peacetime, its consideration during disasters has been neglected. The World Health Organization (WHO) has acknowledged the importance of PHC in guaranteeing continuity of care during and after a disaster for avoiding negative health outcomes. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the extent and nature of research activity on the use of ACSCs during disasters, with an eye toward finding innovative ways to assess the level of PHC function at times of crisis. Online databases were searched to identify papers. A final list of nine publications was retrieved. The analysis of the reviewed articles confirmed that ACSCs can serve as a useful indicator of PHC performance during disasters, with several caveats that must be considered. The reviewed articles cover several disaster scenarios and a wide variety of methodologies showing the connection between ACSCs and health system performance. The strengths and weaknesses of using different methodologies are explored and recommendations are given for using ACSCs to assess PHC performance during disasters.