A Qualitative Assessment of Low Vision Care Among Optometric Practitioners in Sub-Saharan Africa Using a Health Systems Framework

Résumé fourni par la source

Background: Low vision care and rehabilitation (LVCR) remains critically underdeveloped in sub-Saharan Africa, despite a high prevalence of moderate to severe visual impairment. Objective: This study assessed the current state of LVCR in five sub-Saharan African countries using a modified World Health Organization (WHO) health systems framework. Method: A qualitative design was employed, involving semi-structured interviews which were based on a modified WHO health system building blocks: governance and leadership, health service delivery, human resource, low vision aid and technology, and financing. Optometrists providing low vision care in Ghana, Nigeria, Malawi, Kenya, and South Africa were recruited as participants through a combination of stratified random sampling and snowballing. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify the underlying themes. Results: Practitioners reported systemic deficiencies across all five blocks investigated. Governance and leadership lacked clear policies, coordination, and data infrastructure. Health service delivery was characterized by poor coverage, the absence of dedicated LVCR centres, and limited integration into public health systems. Human resources were inadequate, with no structured training or recruitment of practitioners, and low recognition of the sub-specialty. Essential assistive technologies were largely inaccessible due to high costs and procurement challenges. Financing was insufficient, with patients primarily paying out-of-pocket and health insurance schemes offering limited support. Conclusion: None of the five blocks of the WHO health systems framework were adequate for LVCR in this study. Consequently, strengthening each block particularly governance, workforce development, and financing is essential for advancing equitable and sustainable LVCR systems in sub-Saharan Africa.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.