All the 32 study participants (Table 1) who were identified during the stakeholder mapping responded to the questionnaire, providing both detailed open-text and closed-ended responses, representing a 100% response rate. The open-text responses are presented as verbatim quotes using the exact text as provided by the respondents. We report on the levels of training in the specified public health disciplines, as well as the participant perspectives on the skills gaps, training needs and skills-mismatch among the sampled health services organisations.
Table1: Participant Categories
Category
|
Organisation
|
# of Interviews
|
|
Zambia National Medical Regulatory Authority (ZAMRA)
|
2
|
General Nursing Council of Zambia (GNCZ)
|
2
|
Zambia Medical Association (ZMA)
|
2
|
Health Professional Council of Zambia (HPCZ)
|
2
|
National Aids Council
|
1
|
- Line Ministries and government departments
|
Ministry of Health- Directorate Public Health, Dept of Policy and Planning
|
1
|
Ministry of National Development Planning
|
1
|
Zambia Correctional Services
|
1
|
|
SANCARE Insurance (private)
|
2
|
Prudential Insurance (private)
|
2
|
|
Zambia Medical Stores Ltd.
|
2
|
Churches Health Association of Zambia
|
2
|
ST Johns Private Hospital
|
2
|
Right to Care EQUIP
|
1
|
Right to care Zambia
|
1
|
|
World Bank Country Office
|
1
|
World Health Organisation Country Office
|
2
|
|
Population Council–Zambia
|
2
|
Akros Research
|
2
|
British American Tobacco
|
1
|
Total Participants
|
|
32
|
1. Level of Training in Selected Public Health Disciplines in the Organisations
The respondents indicated whether their organisation had anyone with some training in each of the three public health disciplines (see Table 2). For health policy and systems, 56% of the respondents indicated that no one had been formally trained in their organisation. For those who reported having had some form of training in the health policy and systems, 19% were trained at masters' level, 13% had received in-service training, 9% had been trained at the bachelor's degree level, and 3% at the PhD level. However, it is essential to note that in almost all instances, the health policy and systems training was received as a part of training in other public health disciplines and not as a specialist field of study.
Only 34% of the respondents reported having someone with some training in health economics in their organisation. Among those trained, 3% received in-service training, 3% were trained at the bachelor's degree level, and 28% at the master's degree level. In terms of full or specialized training, only one respondent reported having had someone in the organisation specially trained in health economics; at the master's level. The rest received health economics training either in-service or as part of other public health related training.
For health services management and planning training, only 22% of the respondents reported having had some training in health services management and planning. Of these, 3% had received in-service training, 3% at the bachelor's degree level, and 16% at the master's degree level. Strikingly, none of the people trained had full or specialized training in health services management and planning.
Table 2: Level of Training across the Three Disciplines
Discipline
|
Level of Training
|
Total
|
|
No Training
|
Trained
|
|
|
In-service
|
Certificate
|
Diploma
|
Degree
|
Masters
|
PhD
|
Health Policy and Systems
|
18
(56%)
|
4
(13%)
|
0
(0%)
|
0
(0%)
|
3
(9%)
|
6
(19%)
|
1
(3%)
|
32
(100 %)
|
Health Economics
|
21
(66%)
|
1
(3%)
|
0
(0%)
|
0
(0%)
|
1
(3%)
|
9
(28%)
|
0
(0%)
|
32
(100%)
|
Health Services Mgt. & Planning
|
25
(78%)
|
1
(3%)
|
0
(0%)
|
0
(0%)
|
1
(3%)
|
5
(16%)
|
0
(0%)
|
32
(100%)
|
2. Importance of Training in the Selected Public Health Disciplines
Almost all organizations indicated that training in the proposed public health disciplines would be beneficial to their organizations (see Table 3). We found that 94% of the respondents felt that specialized postgraduate programs in health policy and systems, as well as health economics, would be very beneficial to their organisations. Also, 91% of the respondents were of the view that formal training in health services management and planning would benefit their organisations.
Table 3: Whether the Training Would be Beneficial to the Organisations
Discipline
|
Yes
|
No
|
Do Not Know
|
Total
|
Health Policy and Systems
|
30
(94%)
|
0
(0%)
|
2
(6%)
|
32
(100%)
|
Health Economics
|
30
(94%)
|
2
(6%)
|
0
(0%)
|
32
(100%)
|
Health Services Mgt. & Planning
|
29
(91%)
|
3
(9%)
|
0
(0%)
|
32
(100%)
|
In terms of the extent of benefit, we asked respondents to indicate, on a Likert scale (High, Medium, and Low), how important specialized training for each of the specified disciplines would be for their organisation. Most respondents indicated that the need is high (see Table 4). In particular, across all three disciplines, at least two-thirds of the respondents were of the view that formal training in these fields was a matter of agency. In contrast, at least a quarter of the respondents thought that the skills gap across the three fields was moderate.
Table 4: Ranking of the Importance of Training in Each Programme
Discipline
|
High
|
Medium
|
Low
|
Total
|
Health Policy and Systems
|
23
(72%)
|
8
(25%)
|
1
(3%)
|
32
(100%)
|
Health Economics
|
22
(69%)
|
9
(28%)
|
1
(3%)
|
32
(100%)
|
Health Services Mgt. & Planning
|
21
(66%)
|
8
(25%)
|
3
(9%)
|
32
(100%)
|
3. Perspectives on the Skills Training Needs in the Selected Public Health Disciplines
The study participants provided detailed descriptions of the reasons why training in the three selected public health disciplines was vital, and more so, what kind of competencies they expected to acquire and how they would benefit practice in their organisations. Furthermore, they described the potential contribution of personnel that would be trained in the selected disciplines to the health system in general.
3.1 Health Policy and Systems Training
Most of the participants reported that having many professionals trained in health policy and systems would not only provide competencies to improve the running of their organisations but the health sector at large. They indicated building such capacity would contribute to a paradigm shift, from solely focusing on clinical functions within the health system to acknowledging the role of supporting functions and how they interact with broader structural factors in the provision of health services. Furthermore, health policy and systems training was said to be critical in providing skills such as change management, as well as being able to set and achieve strategic goals for population health improvement within health systems. It was also stated that health policy and systems training at postgraduate level had a more significant role to play with regards to facilitating innovative research to strengthen health systems through providing evidence to navigate some of the bottlenecks of the system in the provision of essential health services.
"Zambia has a gap in this health policy and systems training and if this is strengthened, it means even employees in Ministry of Health will be keen to carry out the right procedures when it comes to health systems strengthening. These skills will benefit both the private and public health sectors." [KII 23, Research]
"Very essential especially for Directors because they are the policy makers. They need to know what it takes and the impact of their decisions on health services. They also need to be able to do research." [K1I15, Government Ministry]
"Trained people would know what to do and how to go about formulating policies. When evidence is provided trained personnel would know how to transform it into policy brief and present it to the government." [KII19, Cooperating partner]
3.2 Health Economics Training
For health economics, the respondents reported that it would benefit their organisations by providing competencies to facilitate efficient use of meagre health resources. Priority setting was widely mentioned as one of the critical competencies students trained in health economics would have to acquire. Health economics was reported to be vital in building capacity to formulate, evaluate health policies and strategies using economics and econometric approaches. Furthermore, this training would help the health sector personnel to participate adequately in shaping health policy at both the formulation and implementation stages. The participants indicated that health policy implementation remained a challenge in Zambia, and building such capacity would go a long way in improving policy outcomes. It was also reported that introducing health economics training at the University of Zambia could enable the Zambian health sector to count on a pool of locally trained Health Economists that have a full understanding of the local contexts as opposed to outsourcing from outside the country, which is the practice in most organisations. Some of the organisations indicated that they outsourced for activities such as economic evaluations, and introducing health economics training would help address this gap and reduce costs.
"This would be important for our organisation to conduct research, analyse policy and participate in policy shaping and development of health financing" [KII18, Regulatory]
"This training would benefit the organisation because many health service providers we deal with lack the necessary acumen to efficiently manage their health services delivery. This often leads to disputed insurance claims." [KII 27, Insurance]
3.3 Healthcare services Management and Planning Training
The participants reported that training people in management skills such as planning and strategic management would greatly benefit their institutions as well as the health system. They stated that management training contributed to the efficiency with which health services were provided to society. For example, they indicated that the Ministry of Health (MoH) would benefit from personnel trained in the planning of health services at various levels. The participants not only stated the importance of management training at post-graduate level but also highlighted the need for undergraduate training. It was suggested that personnel with undergraduate training would execute operational level management functions within the health system, whilst higher level management decision making and research would be the focus of the postgraduate training. Furthermore, management training was said to be vital in proving competencies to enhance public health leadership across health services teams and organisations.
"We will be more precise in planning and avoid budget variations. Secondly, it would also be more beneficial to planners in MoH. Currently they employ people who have done development studies. But the demographers don't have a good understanding of the health system" [K14, Regulatory]
"Effective health services management and planning will help assist both public and private institutions in planning and managing resources and programs effectively in organisations where resources are finite." [K22, Health services]
3.4 Skills Training Needs
We also identified the particular skills training needed in order of importance and relative frequency of responses on the need for selected skills. These are summarized in Table 5. For health policy and systems training, the top skills desired were policy analysis and planning (72%), monitoring and evaluation of health programs (72%), and health systems research capacity (72%); followed by implementation and management of health programs (56%), change management (53%), and training relating to policy, politics and power (32%). For health economics training, the most critical skills needs are health care financing (75%), economic evaluation of health programs (75%); followed by decision-analytic modelling (59%), and health economics research capacity (59%). There is also a demand for training in the operations of the health insurance market (56%) and measuring health system efficiency (53%). For health services management and practice, the most sought out skill was strategic management in health programs (69%), followed by leadership and management in health programs (66%), and program implementation (56%).
Table 5: Competency Needs by Discipline
Health Policy and Systems
|
Health Economics
|
Health Services Management and Planning
|
Policy analysis and planning (72%)
Monitoring and evaluating health programmes (72 %)
Health systems research capacity (72%)
Implementing and managing programmes in Health systems (56%)
Managing change in health systems (53%)
Policy, politics and power (34%)
|
Health care financing (75%)
Economic evaluation of health programmes (75%)
Decision analytic modelling (59%)
Health economics research capacity (59%)
Understanding the health insurance markets (56%)
Measuring health system efficiency (53%)
|
Strategic management in Health programmes (69%)
Leadership and management in Health programmes (66%)
Implementing programmes in the health system (56%)
|
4. Skills Mismatch
An alternative way of looking at the skills gap is to look at the skills mismatch – the misplacement of skills for a given job description. In this study, this is taken to imply a situation where a person not formally trained (as part of a specialist programme) to perform roles related to a given public health field is performing those roles. We found significant horizontal skills mismatch in both health economics and health services management and planning (see Table 6). All people performing functions relating to health services management and planning were not formally trained to accomplish them. While some of the respondents performed roles of strategic management and leadership in health programmes, none of them was officially trained in these competencies. For health economics roles relating to health care financing, evaluation of health programmes and the assessment of health system efficiency, 93% of people performing them were not formally trained.
Table 6: Level of Skills Mismatch
Disciplines
|
Someone Performing Related Roles
|
Formally Trained for the Role
|
Skills Match
|
Skills Mismatch
|
Health Economics
|
14
|
1
|
79%
|
93%
|
Health Services Mgt. & Planning
|
14
|
0
|
0%
|
100%
|