Existing definitions and measurement approaches of quality of health care often fail to address the complexities involved in understanding quality of care. It is perceptions of quality, rather than clinical indicators of quality, that drive service utilization and are essential to increasing demand. Here we reflect on the nature of quality, how perceptions of quality influence health systems and what such perceptions indicate about measurement of quality within health systems. We discuss six specific challenges related to the conceptualization and measurement of the quality of care: perceived quality as a driver of service utilization; quality as a concept shaped over time through experience; responsiveness as a key attribute of quality; the role of management and other so-called upstream factors; quality as a social construct co-produced by families, individuals, networks and providers; and the implications of our observations for measurement. Within the communities and societies where care is provided, quality of care cannot be understood outside social norms, relationships, trust and values. We need to improve not only technical quality but also acceptability, responsiveness and levels of patient-provider trust. Measurement approaches need to be reconsidered. An improved understanding of all the attributes of quality in health systems and their interrelationships could support the expansion of access to essential health interventions.

The recent outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in West Africa has drawn attention to the role and responsiveness of health systems in the face of shock. It brought into sharp focus the idea that health systems need not only to be stronger but also more ‘resilient’. In this article, we argue that responding to shocks is an important aspect of resilience, examining the health system behaviour in the face of four types of contemporary shocks: the financial crisis in Europe from 2008 onwards; climate change disasters; the EVD outbreak in West Africa 2013–16; and the recent refugee and migration crisis in Europe. Based on this analysis, we identify ‘3 plus 2’ critical dimensions of particular relevance to health systems’ ability to adapt and respond to shocks; actions in all of these will determine the extent to which a response is successful. These are three core dimensions corresponding to three health systems functions: ‘health information systems’ (having the information and the knowledge to make a decision on what needs to be done); ‘funding/financing mechanisms’ (investing or mobilising resources to fund a response); and ‘health workforce’ (who should plan and implement it and how). These intersect with two cross-cutting aspects: ‘governance’, as a fundamental function affecting all other system dimensions; and predominant ‘values’ shaping the response, and how it is experienced at individual and community levels. Moreover, across the crises examined here, integration within the health system contributed to resilience, as does connecting with local communities, evidenced by successful community responses to Ebola and social movements responding to the financial crisis. In all crises, inequalities grew, yet our evidence also highlights that the impact of shocks is amenable to government action. All these factors are shaped by context. We argue that the ‘3 plus 2’ dimensions can inform pragmatic policies seeking to increase health systems resilience.

Background. Medical tourism is a growing phenomenon. This review of the literature maps current knowledge and discusses findings with reference to the

‘Medical Tourism’ – the phenomenon of people travelling abroad to access medical treatment - has received increasing attention in academic and popular media. This paper reports findings from a study examining effect of inbound and outbound medical tourism on the UK NHS, by estimating volume of medical tourism and associated costs and benefits. A mixed methods study it includes analysis of the UK International Passenger Survey (IPS); interviews with 77 returning UK medical tourists, 63 policymakers, NHS managers and medical tourism industry actors policymakers, and a review of published literature. These informed costing of three types of treatments for which patients commonly travel abroad: fertility treatment, cosmetic and bariatric surgery. Costing of inbound tourism relied on data obtained through 28 Freedom-of-Information requests to NHS Foundation Trusts. Findings demonstrate that contrary to some popular media reports, far from being a net importer of patients, the UK is now a clear net exporter of medical travellers. In 2010, an estimated 63,000 UK residents travelled for treatment, while around 52,000 patients sought treatment in the UK. Inbound medical tourists treated as private patients within NHS facilities may be especially profitable when compared to UK private patients, yielding close to a quarter of revenue from only 7% of volume in the data examined. Costs arise where patients travel abroad and return with complications. Analysis also indicates possible savings especially in future health care and social costs averted. These are likely to be specific to procedures and conditions treated. UK medical tourism is a growing phenomenon that presents risks and opportunities to the NHS. To fully understand its implications and guide policy on issues such as NHS global activities and patient safety will require investment in further research and monitoring. Results point to likely impact of medical tourism in other universal public health systems.

Globally, the use of mobile phones for improving access to healthcare and conducting health research has gained traction in recent years as rates of ownership increase, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Mobile instant messaging applications, including WhatsApp Messenger, provide new and affordable opportunities for health research across time and place, potentially addressing the challenges of maintaining contact and participation involved in research with migrant and mobile populations, for example. However, little is known about the opportunities and challenges associated with the use of WhatsApp as a tool for health research. To inform our study, we conducted a scoping review of published health research that uses WhatsApp as a data collection tool. A key reason for focusing on WhatsApp is the ability to retain contact with participants when they cross international borders. Five key public health databases were searched for articles containing the words ‘WhatsApp’ and ‘health research’ in their titles and abstracts. We identified 69 articles, 16 of which met our inclusion criteria for review. We extracted data pertaining to the characteristics of the research. Across the 16 studies—11 of which were based in LMICs—WhatsApp was primarily used in one of two ways. In the eight quantitative studies identified, seven used WhatsApp to send hyperlinks to online surveys. With one exception, the eight studies that employed a qualitative (n = 6) or mixed-method (n = 2) design analysed the WhatsApp content generated through a WhatsApp-based programmatic intervention. We found a lack of attention paid to research ethics across the studies, which is concerning given the controversies WhatsApp has faced with regard to data protection in relation to end-to-end encryption. We provide recommendations to address these issues for researchers considering using WhatsApp as a data collection tool over time and place.