Six takeaways from the International Conference for Public Health in Africa | Blogs

4. We need to be talking about (and funding) health care as a whole, not individual diseases

Often, funding is allocated for projects that tackle individual diseases rather than health care as a whole. But the health care system isn’t working effectively if you successfully treat someone for HIV and they then die of a non-communicable disease (as an example).

We need to look at health care as a system, not as one disease. We need an integrated approach to health and one where we are not funding parallel programmes or tackling single diseases. At CPHIA, there seemed to be a consensus among attendees that this is the best approach, but the problem seems to be that funding has already been committed for programmes tackling a single disease for a period of time, perhaps for the next five to 10 years. Who has the power to reallocate funding or to change that?

When we’re talking about a comprehensive and integrated approach to health care, we must make sure that eye health is on the table and is one of the priorities.

5. Eye care needs to be included in primary health care

Sessions at the conference explored how improving primary health care makes the overall health system better. It was quite interesting for me to see everybody realise that we need health security to achieve universal health coverage.

Then, we need to ensure that eye health is included at the primary level so that when we are driving that agenda, we are also pushing for the integration of eye care into primary health care.

It was promising to see sessions discussing what percentage of the health budget goes to primary health care. How much are we expecting out of our health care? If we believe that improving primary level services will address most of the problems, is this reflected in the budget? Or are we just putting pressure on primary health care to achieve something without adequate resources?

6. Technology is exciting, but we have to be careful

The conference was instrumental in furthering my understanding of where Africa and the rest of the world are heading regarding innovation and technology, with both developments affecting eye health. Technology and innovation are good, but they also have a downside. Therefore, there is a need for an appropriate governance structure for innovation and technology at different levels. There are also questions about how we regulate technology and aspirations to make sure we use it to complement our existing work, not create more parallel systems.

I think that we should look at how technology can help us. For example, when it comes to diagnostics, we must look at the technology or innovations that can help us reach the people left furthest behind.

Then, how do those diagnoses get fed back and how does this data get captured in the health system?

Final thoughts

I feel a profound sense of responsibility to play my part, however small, in ensuring that everyone has access to high-quality, sustainable, and equitable health services when they need them. No one should suffer the tragedy of avoidable blindness.

Currently, 1.1 billion people worldwide have an untreated or preventable visual impairment. And the problem is spiralling – without urgent improvement to eye health services worldwide, 61 million people could be blind by 2050.

Eye health needs to be prioritised as part of a comprehensive approach to primary health care and universal health coverage. While progress has been made, work still needs to be done to ensure eye health services are an integral part of national health care.

Countries need to ensure eye health is represented in their planning, resourcing and funding of health care.

Why? Because Eye health equals opportunity, allowing children to learn and adults to earn. It equals improved wellbeing: supporting families, communities and nations to thrive. And it equals progress towards reducing poverty and inequality.