PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Vidyasagaran, Aishwarya Lakshmi
AU  - Siqueira, Noemia Teixeira de
AU  - Kakchapati, Sampurna
AU  - Hall, Thomas Falconer
AU  - Naznin, Baby
AU  - Tajree, Jannatun
AU  - Quayyum, Zahidul
AU  - Joshi, Deepak
AU  - Sibeudu, Florence Tochukwu
AU  - Ogbozor, Pamela Adaobi
AU  - Arize, Ifeyinwa Ngozi
AU  - Shrestha, Grishu
AU  - Golder, Su
AU  - Ahsan, Maisha
AU  - Adhikary, Swaksar
AU  - Agwu, Prince
AU  - Elsey, Helen
TI  - Public–Private Mix (PPM) for Tuberculosis (TB) in Urban Health Systems in Least Developed, Low Income and Lower-Middle-Income Countries and Territories – A Systematic Review
AID  - 10.1101/2024.05.01.24306566
DP  - 2024 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2024.05.01.24306566
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/01/2024.05.01.24306566.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/01/2024.05.01.24306566.full
AB  - Objective To assess the impact of Public-Private Mix (PPM) models for Tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis and treatment on health, process, and system outcomes within urban contexts of least developed, low Income, and lower-middle-income countries and territories (LMICs).Design Systematic review.Study selection Ten electronic databases and research repositories, covering published and grey literature were searched on 15 August 2022. All primary studies on PPM models delivering TB services in urban health sectors of eligible countries were included. There were no restrictions applied by type of outcome measurement, publication date, or language.Data extraction and synthesis Data were extracted on COVIDENCE and quality appraisals were carried out using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Narrative synthesis was carried out by tabulating studies according to PPM model types (direct or interface), and assessing their performance on TB health, process (including cost-effectiveness) and system outcomes.Results Of the 55 included studies, covering quantitative (n=41), qualitative (n=5), and mixed-method (n=9) designs, the majority were from South-East Asia (n=36). PPM models had overall positive results on TB treatment outcomes, access and coverage, and value for money. They also promoted and improved TB health workers’ skills and service delivery. Most outcomes tended to favour interface models, albeit with considerable heterogeneity. Inconsistent implementation of NTP guidelines, uncoordinated referrals, and lack of trust among partners were identified as areas of improvement. Evidence was lacking on involvement of informal providers within PPM models.Conclusions PPM models can be effective and cost-effective for TB care in urban LMIC contexts, particularly when levels of mistrust between public and private sectors are addressed through principles of equal partnership. The evidence indicates that this may be more achievable when an interface organisation manages the partnership.Study registration PROSPERO CRD42021289509.Key messages What is already known on this topic?-Although previous reviews have concluded overall improvements in Tuberculosis (TB) service outcomes with Public-Private Mix (PPM) implementation, they did not explicitly focus on urban contexts. Given the rate of urbanisation in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) and the proliferation of PPs in urban areas, an up-to-date synthesis of the urban-specific evidence is needed for policy makers to design effective PPMs.What this study adds-Following recommended guidelines for conducting systematic reviews, we have narratively synthesised the evidence on the impact of TB-PPM models across health, process, and system outcomes within urban contexts of LMICs.-The implemented models appear cost-effective form the societal perspective and contribute to better TB treatment outcomes, and increased access and coverage. They also consistently promote TB health workers’ skills and service delivery. Mistrust between public and private sectors can be addressed through regular communications built on principles of equal partnership.-Although most results tend to favour models managed by interface organisations, the high heterogeneity and poor quality-scores of reporting studies must be considered.How this study might affect research, practice, or policy-This context-specific mixed-methods systematic review supports the implementation of PPM models for TB care in cities in LMICs. Providing decision-makers with evidence on the best design of PPM models is, however, less straightforward.-Our review supports the need for more studies assessing different PPM model types, as well as clearer and more standard reporting of models and their performances.-Very few studies mentioned the inclusion of informal providers in PPM-TB models. These providers have an important role in providing healthcare for vulnerable urban populations in the LMIC contexts. This gap must be addressed in future discussions and planning of TB-PPM models.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementCHORUS funded by UK Aid, from the UK Government, Grant 301132Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.