An Essential Pathology Package for Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Kenneth A. Fleming,Mahendra Naidoo,Michael Wilson,John Flanigan,Susan Horton,Modupe Kuti,Lai Meng Looi,Chris Price,Kun Ru,Abdul Ghafur,Jianxiang Wang,Nestor Lago
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqw143
2016-01-01
American Journal of Clinical Pathology
Abstract:Objectives: We review the current status of pathology services in low-and middle-income countries and propose an "essential pathology package" along with estimated costs. The purpose is to provide guidance to policy makers as countries move toward universal health care systems.Methods: Five key themes were reviewed using existing literature (role of leadership; education, training, and continuing professional development; technology; accreditation, management, and quality standards; and reimbursement systems). A tiered system is described, building on existing proposals. The economic analysis draws on the very limited published studies, combined with expert opinion.Results: Countries have underinvested in pathology services, with detrimental effects on health care. The equipment needs for a tier 1 laboratory in a primary health facility are modest ($ 2-$ 5,000), compared with $ 150,000 to $ 200,000 in a district hospital, and higher in a referral hospital (depending on tests undertaken). Access to a national (or regional) specialized laboratory undertaking disease surveillance and registry is important. Recurrent costs of appropriate laboratories in district and referral hospitals are around 6% of the hospital budget in midsized hospitals and likely decline in the largest hospitals. Primary health facilities rely largely on single-use tests.Conclusions: Pathology is an essential component of good universal health care.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?