Effect of specificity of health expenditure questions in the measurement of out-of-pocket health expenditure: evidence from field experimental study in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: The effect of number of health items on out-of-pockets (OOPs) has been identified as a source of bias in measuring OOPs. Evidence comes mostly from cross-sectional comparison of different survey instruments to collect data on OOPs. Very few studies have attempted to validate these questionnaires, or distinguish bias arising from the comprehensiveness of the OOPs list versus specificity of OOPs questions. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to estimate biases arising from the specificity of OOPs questions by comparing provider and household's information. METHODS: A generic questionnaire to collect data on household's OOPs was developed following the nomenclature proposed in division 6 of the classification of household final consumption 2018. The four categories within such division are used to set the comprehensiveness of the OOPs list, the specificity within each category was tailored to the design of the nationally representative living standard survey in Ghana where a field experiment was conducted to test the validity of different versions. Households were randomised to 11, 44 or 56 health items. Using data from provider records as the gold standard, we compared the mean positive OOPs, and estimated the mean ratio and variability in the ratio of household expenditures to provider data for the individual households using the Bland-Altman method of assessing agreement. FINDINGS: We found evidence of a difference in the overall mean ratio in the specificity for OOPs in inpatient care and medications. Within each of these two categories, a more detailed disaggregation yielded lower OOPs estimates than less detailed ones. The level of agreement between household and provider OOPs also decreased with increasing specificity of health items. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that, for inpatient care and medications, systematically decomposing OOPs categories into finer subclasses tend to produce lower OOPs estimates. Less detailed items produced more accurate and reliable OOPs estimates in the context of a rural setting.

What are the Technical and Allocative Efficiencies of Public Health Centres in Ghana?

INTRODUCTION: Health systems in developing countries including Ghana are faced with critical resource constraints in pursuing the goal of improving the health status of the population. The constrained ability to adequately meet health care needs is exacerbated by inefficiency in the health care systems, especially within public health centres. METHODS: The study used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) method, to calculate the technical and allocative efficiency of 113 randomly sampled health centres. A logistic regression model was also applied on whether a health centre was technically efficient or not to determine the factors that significantly influence the efficiency of health centres. FINDINGS: The findings showed that 78% of health centres were technically inefficient and so were using resources that they did not actually need. Eight-eight percent were also allocatively inefficient. The overall efficiency, (product of the technical and allocative efficiency), was also calculated and over 90% of the health centres were inefficient. The results of a logistic regression analysis show that newer health centres and those which receive incentives were more likely to be technically efficient compared to older health centres and those who did receive incentives. CONCLUSION: The results broadly point to grave inefficiency in the health care delivery system of the health centres and that lots of resources could be saved if measures were put in place to curb the waste. Incentives to health centres were found to be major motivating factors to the promotion of efficiency.