Akililu Endalamaw

Mr. Akililu Endalamaw

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 July 2017 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
RBRyan M Barber
Ryan M Barber
NFNancy Fullman
Nancy Fullman
RSReed J D Sorensen
Reed J D Sorensen
TBThomas Bollyky
Thomas Bollyky
MMMartin McKee
Martin McKee
CMChristopher J L Murray
Christopher J L Murray
National levels of personal health-care access and quality can be approximated by measuring mortality rates from causes that should not be fatal in the presence of effective medical care (ie, amenable mortality). Previous analyses of mortality amenable to health care only focused on high-income countries and faced several methodological challenges. In the present analysis, we use the highly standardised cause of death and risk factor estimates generated through the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) to improve and expand the quantification of personal health-care access and quality for 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2015. We mapped the most widely used list of causes amenable to personal health care developed by Nolte and McKee to 32 GBD causes. We accounted for variations in cause of death certification and misclassifications through the extensive data standardisation processes and redistribution algorithms developed for GBD. To isolate the effects of personal health-care access and quality, we risk-standardised cause-specific mortality rates for each geography-year by removing the joint effects of local environmental and behavioural risks, and adding back the global levels of risk exposure as estimated for GBD 2015. We employed principal component analysis to create a single, interpretable summary measure-the Healthcare Quality and Access (HAQ) Index-on a scale of 0 to 100. The HAQ Index showed strong convergence validity as compared with other health-system indicators, including health expenditure per capita (r=0·88), an index of 11 universal health coverage interventions (r=0·83), and human resources for health per 1000 (r=0·77). We used free disposal hull analysis with bootstrapping to produce a frontier based on the relationship between the HAQ Index and the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a measure of overall development consisting of income per capita, average years of education, and total fertility rates. This frontier allowed us to better quantify the maximum levels of personal health-care access and quality achieved across the development spectrum, and pinpoint geographies where gaps between observed and potential levels have narrowed or widened over time. Between 1990 and 2015, nearly all countries and territories saw their HAQ Index values improve; nonetheless, the difference between the highest and lowest observed HAQ Index was larger in 2015 than in 1990, ranging from 28·6 to 94·6. Of 195 geographies, 167 had statistically significant increases in HAQ Index levels since 1990, with South Korea, Turkey, Peru, China, and the Maldives recording among the largest gains by 2015. Performance on the HAQ Index and individual causes showed distinct patterns by region and level of development, yet substantial heterogeneities emerged for several causes, including cancers in highest-SDI countries; chronic kidney disease, diabetes, diarrhoeal diseases, and lower respiratory infections among middle-SDI countries; and measles and tetanus among lowest-SDI countries. While the global HAQ Index average rose from 40·7 (95% uncertainty interval, 39·0-42·8) in 1990 to 53·7 (52·2-55·4) in 2015, far less progress occurred in narrowing the gap between observed HAQ Index values and maximum levels achieved; at the global level, the difference between the observed and frontier HAQ Index only decreased from 21·2 in 1990 to 20·1 in 2015. If every country and territory had achieved the highest observed HAQ Index by their corresponding level of SDI, the global average would have been 73·8 in 2015. Several countries, particularly in eastern and western sub-Saharan Africa, reached HAQ Index values similar to or beyond their development levels, whereas others, namely in southern sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and south Asia, lagged behind what geographies of similar development attained between 1990 and 2015. This novel extension of the GBD Study shows the untapped potential for personal health-care access and quality improvement across the development spectrum. Amid substantive advances in personal health care at the national level, heterogeneous patterns for individual causes in given countries or territories suggest that few places have consistently achieved optimal health-care access and quality across health-system functions and therapeutic areas. This is especially evident in middle-SDI countries, many of which have recently undergone or are currently experiencing epidemiological transitions. The HAQ Index, if paired with other measures of health-system characteristics such as intervention coverage, could provide a robust avenue for tracking progress on universal health coverage and identifying local priorities for strengthening personal health-care quality and access throughout the world. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

19 April 2024 in BMC Health Services Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AEAkililu Endalamaw
Akililu Endalamaw
RKResham B Khatri
Resham B Khatri
TMTesfaye Setegn Mengistu
Tesfaye Setegn Mengistu
DEDaniel Erku
Daniel Erku
EWEskinder Wolka
Eskinder Wolka
YAYibeltal Assefa
Yibeltal Assefa
Background: The growing adoption of continuous quality improvement (CQI) initiatives in healthcare has generated a surge in research interest to gain a deeper understanding of CQI. However, comprehensive evidence regarding the diverse facets of CQI in healthcare has been limited. Our review sought to comprehensively grasp the conceptualization and principles of CQI, explore existing models and tools, analyze barriers and facilitators, and investigate its overall impacts.Methods: This qualitative scoping review was conducted using Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework. We searched articles in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. In addition, we accessed articles from Google Scholar. We used mixed-method analysis, including qualitative content analysis and quantitative descriptive for quantitative findings to summarize findings and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) framework to report the overall works.Results: A total of 87 articles, which covered 14 CQI models, were included in the review. While 19 tools were used for CQI models and initiatives, Plan-Do-Study/Check-Act cycle was the commonly employed model to understand the CQI implementation process. The main reported purposes of using CQI, as its positive impact, are to improve the structure of the health system (e.g., leadership, health workforce, health technology use, supplies, and costs), enhance healthcare delivery processes and outputs (e.g., care coordination and linkages, satisfaction, accessibility, continuity of care, safety, and efficiency), and improve treatment outcome (reduce morbidity and mortality). The implementation of CQI is not without challenges. There are cultural (i.e., resistance/reluctance to quality-focused culture and fear of blame or punishment), technical, structural (related to organizational structure, processes, and systems), and strategic (inadequate planning and inappropriate goals) related barriers that were commonly reported during the implementation of CQI.Conclusions: Implementing CQI initiatives necessitates thoroughly comprehending key principles such as teamwork and timeline. To effectively address challenges, it’s crucial to identify obstacles and implement optimal interventions proactively. Healthcare professionals and leaders need to be mentally equipped and cognizant of the significant role CQI initiatives play in achieving purposes for quality of care.

26 November 2018 in Italian Journal of Pediatrics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AEAkililu Endalamaw
Akililu Endalamaw
EEEshetu Haileselassie Engeda
Eshetu Haileselassie Engeda
DEDaniale Tekelia Ekubagewargies
Daniale Tekelia Ekubagewargies
GBGetaneh Mulualem Belay
Getaneh Mulualem Belay
MTMekuriaw Alemayehu Tefera
Mekuriaw Alemayehu Tefera
Different primary studies in Ethiopia showed the burden of low birth weight. However, variation among those studies was seen. This study was aimed to estimate the national prevalence and associated factors of low birth weight in Ethiopia. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar were searched. A funnel plot and Egger’s regression test were used to see publication bias. I-squared statistic was applied to check heterogeneity of studies. A weighted inverse variance random-effects model was applied to estimate the national prevalence and the effect size of associated factors. The subgroup analysis was conducted by region, study design, and year of publication. A total of 30 studies with 55,085 participants were used for prevalence estimation. The pooled prevalence of LBW was 17.3% (95% CI: 14.1–20.4). Maternal age < 20 years (AOR = 1.7; 95% CI:1.5–2.0), pregnancy interval < 24 months (AOR = 2.8; 95%CI: 1.4–4.2), BMI < 18.5 kg/m2 (AOR = 5.6; 95% CI: 1.7–9.4), and gestational age < 37 weeks at birth (AOR = 6.4; 95% CI: 2.5–10.3) were identified factors of LBW. The prevalence of low birth weight in Ethiopia remains high. This review may help policy-makers and program officers to design low birth weight preventive interventions.

27 March 2024 in BMC Primary Care
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AEAkililu Endalamaw
Akililu Endalamaw
RKResham B Khatri
Resham B Khatri
DEDaniel Erku
Daniel Erku
AZAnteneh Zewdie
Anteneh Zewdie
EWEskinder Wolka
Eskinder Wolka
YAYibeltal Assefa
Yibeltal Assefa
Background: Having a sufficient and well-functioning health workforce is crucial for reducing the burden of disease and premature death. Health workforce development, focusing on availability, recruitment, retention, and education, is inseparable from acceptability, motivation, burnout, role and responsibility, and performance. Each aspect of workforce development may face several challenges, requiring specific strategies. However, there was little evidence on barriers and strategies towards comprehensive health workforce development. Therefore, this review explored barriers and strategies for health workforce development at the primary health care level around the world. Methods: A scoping review of reviews was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews. The article search was performed in Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. We used EndNote x9 for managing the collected articles, screening processes, and citation purpose. The scoping review included any kind of review articles on the application of health workforce development concepts, such as availability, recruitment, retention, role and responsibility, education and training, motivation, and burnout, with primary health care and published in English anywhere in the world. Based on the concepts above, barriers and strategies for health workforce development were identified. The findings were synthesized qualitatively based on the building blocks of the health system framework. The analysis involved specific activities such as familiarization, construction of the thematic framework, indexing, charting, and interpretation. The results were presented in texts, tables, and figures. Results: The search strategies yielded 7,276 papers were found. Of which, 69 were included in the scoping review. The most frequently cited barriers were financial challenges and issues related to health care delivery, such as workloads. Barriers affecting healthcare providers directly, including lack of training and ineffective teamwork, were also prominent. Other health system and governance barriers include lack of support, unclear responsibility, and inequity. Another notable barrier was the shortage of health care technology, which pertains to both health care supplies and information technology. The most common cited effective strategies were ongoing support and supervision, engaging with communities, establishing appropriate primary care settings, financial incentives, fostering teamwork, and promoting autonomous health care practice. Conclusions: Effective leadership/governance, a robust health financing system, integration of health information and technology, such as mobile health and ensuring a consistent supply of adequate resources are also vital components of primary health care workforce development. The findings highlight the importance of continuous professional development, which includes training new cadres, implementing effective recruitment and retention mechanisms, optimising the skill mix, and promoting workplace wellness. These elements are essential in fostering a well-trained and resilient primary health care workforce.

3 May 2023 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DEDaniel Erku
Daniel Erku
RKResham Khatri
Resham Khatri
AEAkililu Endalamaw
Akililu Endalamaw
EWEskinder Wolka
Eskinder Wolka
FNFrehiwot Nigatu
Frehiwot Nigatu
YAYibeltal Assefa
Yibeltal Assefa
Background: Community engagement (CE) is an essential component in a primary health care (PHC) and there have been growing calls for service providers to seek greater CE in the planning, design, delivery and evaluation of PHC services. This scoping review aimed to explore the underlying attributes, contexts and mechanisms in which community engagement initiatives contribute to improved PHC service delivery and the realisation of UHC. Methods: PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Google Scholar were searched from the inception of each database until May 2022 for studies that described the structure, process, and outcomes of CE interventions implemented in PHC settings. We included qualitative and quantitative studies, process evaluations and systematic or scoping reviews. Data were extracted using a predefined extraction sheet, and the quality of reporting of included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The Donabedian’s model for quality of healthcare was used to categorise attributes of CE into “structure”, “process” and “outcome”. Results: Themes related to the structural aspects of CE initiatives included the methodological approaches (i.e., format and composition), levels of CE (i.e., extent, time, and timing of engagement) and the support processes and strategies (i.e., skills and capacity) that are put in place to enable both communities and service providers to undertake successful CE. Process aspects of CE initiatives discussed in the literature included: i) the role of the community in defining priorities and setting objectives for CE, ii) types and dynamics of the broad range of engagement approaches and activities, and iii) presence of an on-going communication and two-way information sharing. Key CE components and contextual factors that affected the impact of CE initiatives included the wider socio-economic context, power dynamics and representation of communities and their voices, and cultural and organisational issues. Conclusions: Our review highlighted the potential role of CE initiatives in improving decision making process and improving overall health outcomes, and identified several organisational, cultural, political, and contextual factors that affect the success of CE initiatives in PHC settings. Awareness of and responding to the contextual factors will increase the chances of successful CE initiatives.

23 August 2023 in BMC Health Services Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AEAkililu Endalamaw
Akililu Endalamaw
RKResham Khatri
Resham Khatri
DEDaniel Erku
Daniel Erku
FNFrehiwot Nigatu
Frehiwot Nigatu
AZAnteneh Zewdie
Anteneh Zewdie
YAYibeltal Assefa
Yibeltal Assefa
Background: Quality health services build communities’ and patients’ trust in health care. It enhances the acceptability of services and increases health service coverage. Quality primary health care is imperative for universal health coverage through expanding health institutions and increasing skilled health professionals to deliver services near to people. Evidence on the quality of health system inputs, interactions between health personnel and clients, and outcomes of health care interventions is necessary. This review summarised indicators, successes, and challenges of the quality of primary health care services.Methods: We used the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis extensions for scoping reviews to guide the article selection process. A systematic search of literature from PubMed, Web of Science, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted on August 23, 2022, but the preliminary search was begun on July 5, 2022. The Donabedian’s quality of care framework, consisting of structure, process and outcomes, was used to operationalise and synthesise the findings on the quality of primary health care.Results: Human resources for health, law and policy, infrastructure and facilities, and resources were the common structure indicators. Diagnosis (health assessment and/or laboratory tests) and management (health information, education, and treatment) procedures were the process indicators. Clinical outcomes (cure, mortality, treatment completion), behaviour change, and satisfaction were the common indicators of outcome. Lower cause-specific mortality and a lower rate of hospitalisation in high-income countries were successes, while high mortality due to tuberculosis and the geographical disparity in quality care were challenges in developing countries. There also exist challenges in developed countries (e.g., poor quality mental health care due to a high admission rate). Shortage of health workers was a challenge both in developed and developing countries.Conclusions: Quality of care indicators varied according to the health care problems, which resulted in a disparity in the successes and challenges across countries around the world. Initiatives to improve the quality of primary health care services should ensure the availability of adequate health care providers, equipped health care facilities, appropriate financing mechanisms, enhance compliance with health policy and laws, as well as community and client participation. Additionally, each country should be proactive in monitoring and evaluation of performance indicators in each dimension (structure, process, and outcome) of quality of primary health care services.