Improved health outcomes in urban slums through infrastructure upgrading. Impact of improvement of water supply on household economy in a squatter area of Manila. Strategies for improving the quality of health care in maternal and child health in low- and middle-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews.
The world is rapidly urbanizing with over half the population now living in urban areas. As the urban population grows, so does the proportion of these persons living in slums where conditions are deplorable. These conditions concentrate health hazards leading to higher rates of morbidity and mortality. This growing problem creates a unique challenge for policymakers and public health practitioners. While the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) aim to address these conditions and standards for water and sanitation as well as pertinent health outcomes, little evidence on interventions exists to guide policymakers. Upgrades in slum household water and sanitation systems have not yet been rigorously evaluated to demonstrate whether there is a direct link to improved health outcomes. This study aims to show that slum upgrading as carried out in Ahmedabad, India, led to a significant decline in waterborne illness incidence. We employ a quasi-experimental regression model using health insurance claims (for 2001-2008) as a proxy for passive surveillance of disease incidence. We found that slum upgrading reduced a claimant's likelihood of claiming for waterborne illness from 32% to 14% and from 25% to 10% excluding mosquito-related illnesses. This study shows that upgrades in slum household infrastructure can lead to improved health outcomes and help achieve the MDGs. It also provides guidance on how upgrading in this context using microfinance and a public-private partnership can provide an avenue to affect positive change.
                Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. To estimate the impact of the improvement of water supply. a comparative study on water collection and household expenditure on water was conducted between a former squatter community with an improved water supply (Leveriza: LE) and a typical squatter community with public water faucets (Maestranza: MA) in Manila, the Philippines. Data were collected from 201 structured household interviews and a focus group discussion among housewives in each community. To measure the time spent collecting water, observations of private and public water faucets were conducted. The residents in LE enjoyed significantly larger quantities of water from private water connections than in MA, where only three public water faucets were available as a water source. Conversely, the unit price of water in LE was much lower than in MA. In LE, 72.1% of the households started working for more income using time saved through the improvement of water supply and the proportion of the households under the poverty threshold was reduced from 55.6% to 29.9%. In MA, 68.6% of the households expressed their willingness to work for more income when time spent collecting water was saved. It would be possible for MA to reduce the proportion of the households under the poverty threshold through the improvement of the water supply. The results of the study indicated that the improvement of water supply would possibly encourage urban slum residents to increase their household incomes through reallocating time saved to income-generating activities. The underserved residents spent more money for less water compared to those with access to private water connections. In MA, it took 3-4 h, on average, to complete one water collecting task, even though the nearest public water faucet was within 100 m of any housing unit. This suggests that the definition of accessibility to safe water be reconsidered when discussing the urban poor. There are many systematic reviews of continuing education programmes and educational strategies for quality improvement in health care. Most of the reviewed studies are one-off evaluations rather than impact evaluations with long-term follow-up. There are few systematic reviews of organisational, financial and regulatory interventions, and few high-quality studies. These interventions are probably as or more important than educational strategies, although they are less well evaluated. Few studies have been undertaken in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) or that address maternal and child health (MCH). Thus, the results of the available studies and reviews need to be interpreted cautiously when applied to LMIC. Interactive workshops, reminders and multifaceted interventions can improve professional practice, and they generally have moderate effects. Educational outreach visits consistently improve prescribing but have variable effects on other behaviours. Audit and feedback interventions have variable effects on professional practice, but most often these are small to moderate effects. Mass-media and patient-mediated interventions may change professional practice. Multifaceted interventions that combine several quality-improvement strategies are also effective but may not be more so than single interventions. While all of these strategies are applicable to MCH in LMIC, the applicability of the results to rural settings, in particular, may be limited. Use of these strategies could exacerbate inequalities, and this should be taken into consideration when planning implementation. Scaling up and sustainability may be difficult to achieve in LMIC contexts and need careful consideration. The use of financial interventions has not been well studied; financial incentives and disincentives may be difficult to use effectively and efficiently, although their impact on practice needs to be considered. Organisational interventions are likely to be important, given that there are often underlying organisational or system problems. Regulatory interventions have not been well evaluated, but may sometimes be both inexpensive and effective. There are no 'magic bullets' or simple solutions for ensuring the quality of health care services. Interventions should be selected or tailored to address the underlying reasons for a failure to deliver effective services. Decision-makers should select the most appropriate interventions for specific problems. This requires a governance structure that clearly assigns responsibility for quality-improvement activities, priority setting, selection and design of interventions, and evaluation.
A high risk of bias within the included studies, heterogeneity and evidence gaps prevent firm conclusions on the effect of slum upgrading strategies on health and socio-economic wellbeing. The most common health and socio-economic outcomes reported were communicable diseases and indicators of financial poverty. There was a limited but consistent body of evidence to suggest that slum upgrading may reduce the incidence of diarrhoeal diseases and water-related expenditure. The information available on slum dwellers’ perspectives provided some insight to barriers and facilitators for successful implementation and maintenance of interventions.
The availability and use of reliable, comparable outcome measures to determine the effect of slum upgrading on health, quality of life and socio-economic wellbeing would make a useful contribution to new research in this important area. Given the complexity in delivering slum upgrading, evaluations should look to incorporate process and qualitative information alongside quantitative effectiveness data to determine which particular interventions work (or don’t work) and for whom.