Imagine a big health emergency hits, like the 2014 Ebola outbreak. You'd think the main concern would be containing the virus, right? Well, it turns out that the disruption in access to other important health services can cause even more damage. During that outbreak alone, over 10, 000 people died not from Ebola, but from measles, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria because they couldn't get the care they needed.

Low- and middle-income countries, which already bear the biggest burden of diseases like HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria, are hit the hardest during these emergencies. It's like their health systems are trying to fix a leak while the roof is caving in.

You might be thinking, why isn't there a plan to keep these crucial services going during emergencies? Good question! Though there are frameworks for preparing and responding to diseases, these mostly focus on boosting emergency response. They don't pay much attention to ensuring health services keep running smoothly.

Picture this: a systematic review is like a big puzzle, you gather all the pieces (in this case, interventions implemented to maintain service delivery) and put them together to see the whole picture. So far, no one has done that for these specific health services during emergencies.

The goal here is to figure out what's worked and what hasn't. Maybe some countries did a great job maintaining HIV services, while others dropped the ball on tuberculosis care. By learning from each other, we can make sure that future health emergencies don't leave vulnerable people behind.

Keeping Health Services Going During Big Emergencies

Actions