| Literature DB >> 33853601 |
Don de Savigny1,2, Daniel Cobos Muñoz1,2, Carmen Sant Fruchtman3,4, Selemani Mbuyita5, Mary Mwanyika-Sando5, Marcel Braun6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: SMS for Life was one of the earliest large-scale implementations of mHealth innovations worldwide. Its goal was to increase visibility to antimalarial stock-outs through the use of SMS technology. The objective of this case study was to show the multiple innovations that SMS for Life brought to the Tanzanian public health sector and to discuss the challenges of scaling up that led to its discontinuation from a health systems perspective.Entities:
Keywords: Case study; Digital health; Scale-up; Systems thinking
Year: 2021 PMID: 33853601 PMCID: PMC8048333 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06285-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Work organization and level of interviewees
| Stakeholder organisation | Level | Interviewees |
|---|---|---|
| Civil society | National | 2 |
| District Health Management Team | District | 3 |
| Donor SMS for Life | Global | 3 |
| External advisor Ministry of Health | Global/National | 2 |
| External researcher | National | 2 |
| Health personnel reporting with SMS | Health facility | 3 |
| Medical Stores Department (MSD) | National | 1 |
| Ministry of Health | District | 3 |
| National Malaria Control Programme | National | 3 |
| Other supply chain donors | Global/National | 2 |
| SMS for Life project management | Global/National | 4 |
Domains explored during thematic content analysis using MAPS toolkit
| MAPS Domain | Theme |
|---|---|
| Groundwork | Were the policy and technical environments in the country assessed before scale-up? |
| Partnerships | Were specific product champions established among core partners? |
| Financial health | Were the potential economic costs of scaling up the technology forecasted? |
| Technology & architecture | Were relevant steps taken to ensure interoperability with relevant information systems? |
| Operations | Were training programmes developed to train end-users and secondary users? |
| Monitoring & evaluation | Were appropriate resources allocated to monitoring and evaluation during scale-up? |
Summary of main themes identified in the thematic analysis across the MAPS domains
| MAPS Domain | Main themes identified | |
|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | |
| Groundwork | ➢ Very successful pilot ➢ The goal of the programme aligned with the country’s priorities | ➢ SMS for Life was short in objective-setting (focus on stock-out visibility and not on an appropriate response to stock-outs) |
| Partnerships | ➢ SMS for Life aimed to engage with all key stakeholders | ➢ Not all key stakeholders were involved in the design and deployment (e.g district pharmacists) ➢ Narrow partnership scope focussed on limited commodities for a single disease control programme ➢ No inclusion of Zonal or National MSD in the system ➢ Lack of ownership at MSD and district level led to a lack of action when stock-outs were reported ➢ Changes in government, ministerial leadership and political agendas led to the loss of SMS for Life’s momentum ➢ This loss of momentum was strongly influenced by the arrival of competitor mHealth solutions |
| Financial health | ➢ SMS for Life project managers described the system as a very low cost solution as it didn’t need any maintenance or technical support | ➢ The costs of the programme were stated as one of the main reasons for discontinuation although no real costing was done ➢ It was difficult for the government to allocate a substantial share of its budget to malaria commodities and not to others ➢ Main drivers of the programme’s costs were: SMS and health worker incentives (pay-for-performance) |
| Technology & architecture | ➢ Real-time data in rural health facilities in a time when this was uncommon ➢ Described as a user-friendly system ➢ Technology included quality checks ➢ Interoperability within mobile network operators was an innovation and at the same time challenge for the programme ➢ Technology was an innovation for Tanzania and mHealth globally | ➢ Lack of adaptability of the technology to new circumstances in the country ➢ Data server and hosting in the United Kingdom seen as a political challenge ➢ Lack of interoperability with the national health management information system (HMIS) ➢ No change or improvement in the user interface between 2009 and 2015 |
| Operations | ➢ SMS for Life trained health facility personnel to store commodities more efficiently, these changes are still visible today | ➢ The scale-up planning only included the organization of training ➢ Lack of response from the health system in case of stock-outs (see Table ➢ High turnover of personnel at the health facilities caused a knowledge loss of the programme, as only one person was trained per facility. This led to high attrition rates from the system ➢ No continuing training plans |
| Monitoring & evaluation | ➢ Antimalarial stock situation improved during the years, mainly due to other changes in Tanzanian supply chain system (e.g. MSD Direct Delivery system). | ➢ No monitoring and evaluation framework ➢ One external evaluation conducted in 2013 reported several challenges that were never addressed |
Reasons stated for the lack of action to solve stock-outs at district level
| 1) Commodities claimed not to be available at MSD, often due to delays in procurement | |
| 2) Lack of resources for transport between health facilities or to pick up drugs at MSD | |
| 3) Unwillingness by the health facilities to reallocate their surplus stock due to lack of confidence in a replenishment delivery | |
| 4) Lack of ownership of district leadership of the programme, which led to a lack of use of the collected data |
Fig. 1Process map representing parallel logistic systems in Tanzania (2011–2014)
Fig. 2Lessons learned of SMS for Life scale-up in Tanzania