Correction to: benefit incidence analysis in public health facilities in India: utilization and benefits at the national and state levels.

.

Benefit incidence analysis in public health facilities in India: utilization and benefits at the national and state levels.

BACKGROUND: Benefit Incidence Analysis (BIA) is used to understand the distribution of health care utilization and spending in comparison to income distribution. The results can illustrate how effectively governments allocate limited resources towards meeting the needs of the poor. In analyzing the distribution of public spending on inpatient, outpatient, and deliveries, this paper represents the most recent BIA completed in India. METHODS: In order to conduct the BIA statistical analysis for this project, 2014 utilization data from the most recently completed Indian National Sample Survey (NSS) was used. Unit costs were estimated for primary care, hospital inpatient, hospital outpatient, and deliveries. Concentration curves and concentration indices were estimated both at the national and state levels. Analyses were reported for overall utilization, as well as for the gross and net benefits for inpatient, outpatient, and deliveries. RESULTS: According to the results, utilization of government inpatient and delivery services is pro-poor. When gross and net benefits are included in the analysis, services become more equal and less pro-poor. Gross benefits, which are measured with state-level unit costs, are virtually equal for all services. Although there are some pro-poor gross benefits trends for national outpatient services, the results also show that the equality of national gross benefits trends hides a significant disparity across Indian States. While a number of Indian States have outpatient gross benefits that are pro-poor, few show pro-poor benefits for inpatient and delivery services. Net benefits, which considers both unit costs for each respective service, and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures, trend similarly to gross benefits. In addition, those who use public facilities spend considerable OOP to supplement government services. CONCLUSIONS: This BIA reveals that government spending on public health care has not resulted in significantly pro-poor services. While some progress has been made relative to deliveries and outpatient services, inpatient stays are not pro-poor. In addition, national results mask significant disparities across Indian states.

Impact of conditional cash transfers on maternal and newborn health.

Maternal and newborn health (MNH) is a high priority for global health and is included among the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). However, the slow decline in maternal and newborn mortality jeopardizes achievements of the targets of MDGs. According to UNICEF, 60 million women give birth outside of health facilities, and family planning needs are satisfied for only 50%. Further, skilled birth attendance and the use of antenatal care are most inequitably distributed in maternal and newborn health interventions in low- and middle-income countries. Conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes have been shown to increase health service utilization among the poorest but little is written on the effects of such programmes on maternal and newborn health. We carried out a systematic review of studies on CCT that report maternal and newborn health outcomes, including studies from 8 countries. The CCT programmes have increased antenatal visits, skilled attendance at birth, delivery at a health facility, and tetanus toxoid vaccination for mothers and reduced the incidence of low birthweight. The programmes have not had a significant impact on fertility while the impact on maternal and newborn mortality has not been well-documented thus far. Given these positive effects, we make the case for further investment in CCT programmes for maternal and newborn health, noting gaps in knowledge and providing recommendations for better design and evaluation of such programmes. We recommend more rigorous impact evaluations that document impact pathways and take factors, such as cost-effectiveness, into account.

Using allocative efficiency analysis to inform health benefits package design for progressing towards Universal Health Coverage: Proof-of-concept studies in countries seeking decision support.

BACKGROUND: Countries are increasingly defining health benefits packages (HBPs) as a way of progressing towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC). Resources for health are commonly constrained, so it is imperative to allocate funds as efficiently as possible. We conducted allocative efficiency analyses using the Health Interventions Prioritization tool (HIPtool) to estimate the cost and impact of potential HBPs in three countries. These analyses explore the usefulness of allocative efficiency analysis and HIPtool in particular, in contributing to priority setting discussions. METHODS AND FINDINGS: HIPtool is an open-access and open-source allocative efficiency modelling tool. It is preloaded with publicly available data, including data on the 218 cost-effective interventions comprising the Essential UHC package identified in the 3rd Edition of Disease Control Priorities, and global burden of disease data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. For these analyses, the data were adapted to the health systems of Armenia, Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe. Local data replaced global data where possible. Optimized resource allocations were then estimated using the optimization algorithm. In Armenia, optimized spending on UHC interventions could avert 26% more disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), but even highly cost-effective interventions are not funded without an increase in the current health budget. In Côte d'Ivoire, surgical interventions, maternal and child health and health promotion interventions are scaled up under optimized spending with an estimated 22% increase in DALYs averted-mostly at the primary care level. In Zimbabwe, the estimated gain was even higher at 49% of additional DALYs averted through optimized spending. CONCLUSIONS: HIPtool applications can assist discussions around spending prioritization, HBP design and primary health care transformation. The analyses provided actionable policy recommendations regarding spending allocations across specific delivery platforms, disease programs and interventions. Resource constraints exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic increase the need for formal planning of resource allocation to maximize health benefits.

The role of health system context in the design and implementation of performance-based financing: evidence from Cote d'Ivoire.

Low quality of care is a significant problem for health systems in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Policymakers are increasingly interested in using performance-based financing (PBF), a system-wide provider payment reform, conditioned on both quantity and quality of performance, to improve quality of care. The health system context influences both the design and the implementation of these programmes and thus their effectiveness. This study analyses how context has influenced the design and implementation of PBF in improving the quality of primary care in one particular setting, Cote d'Ivoire, a lower-middle income country with some of the poorest health outcomes in the world. Based on literature, an analytical framework was developed identifying five pathways through which financial incentives can influence the quality of primary care: earmarking, conditioning, provider behaviour, community involvement and management. Guided by this framework, semistructured interviews were conducted with policymakers and providers to diagnose the context and to assess the links between financing and quality of care at the primary care level. PBF in Cote d'Ivoire was found to have increased data availability and quality, facility-wide and disease-specific inputs, provider motivation and management practices in contracted facilities, but had limited success in improving process and outcome measures of quality, as well as community involvement and the provision of non-incentivised services. These limitations were attributable to a centralised health system structure constraining the decision space of health providers; financing and governance challenges across the health sector; and shortcomings with regard to the design of the PBF quality checklist and incentive structures in Cote d'Ivoire. In order to improve the quality of primary care, health sector reforms such as PBF should incorporate the organisational and service delivery context more broadly into their design and implementation, as is the case in other countries.

Applying behavioural economics to health systems of low- and middle-income countries: what are policymakers' and practitioners' views?

Interest in behavioural economics has soared in recent years, particularly because of its application to several areas of public policy, now including international development, education, and health. Yet, little is known about how the policy and political implications of behavioural economics are perceived among stakeholders. Using an innovative vignette-based online survey, we assessed the opinions of 520 policymakers and practitioners around the world about health policy recommendations emanating from behavioural economics principles that are relevant to low- and middle-income country settings. We also determined the sources of disagreement among the respondents. The results suggest that there is strong support for health policies based on the concepts of framing choices to overcome present bias, providing periodic information to form habits, and messaging to promote social norms. There is less support for policies which use cash rewards as extrinsic motivators either to change individual behaviour related to the management of chronic conditions or to mitigate risky sexual behaviour. The sources of disagreement for these policy prescriptions derive mainly from normative concerns and perceived lack of effectiveness of such interventions. Addressing these disagreements may require developing a broader research agenda to explore the policy and political implications of these prescriptions.

Measuring government commitment to vaccination.

Vaccination is among the most cost-effective health interventions and has attracted ever greater levels of funding from public and private donors. However, some countries, mainly populous lower-middle income countries, are lagging behind on vaccination financing and performance. In this paper, we discuss the rationale for investing in vaccination and construct a metric to measure government commitment to vaccination that could promote accountability and better tracking of performance. While noting the limitations of available data, we find that populous middle-income countries, which stand to gain tremendously from increased vaccination uptake, perform poorly in terms of their vaccination outcomes.

Performance-based financing at the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria: an analysis of grant ratings and funding, 2003-12.

BACKGROUND: Performance-based financing can be used by global health funding agencies to improve programme performance and thus value for money. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was one of the first global-health funders to deploy a performance-based financing system. However, its complex, multistep system for calculating and paying on grant ratings has several components that are subjective and discretionary. We aimed to test the association between grant ratings and disbursements, an indication of the extent to which incentives for performance are transmitted to grant recipients. METHODS: We obtained publicly available data for 508 Global Fund grants from 2003 to 2012 with performance ratings and corresponding disbursements, merged with other datasets that contained data for relevant country characteristics. We used regression analysis to identify predictors of grant disbursements in phase 2 (typically the latter 3 of 5 years of a grant), using two dependent variables: whether a grant had any phase-2 disbursements, and the phase-2 disbursement amount. In a separate analysis, we also investigated the predictors of grant performance ratings. FINDINGS: Grant performance rating in phase 1 was positively associated with having any disbursements in phase 2, but no association was seen between phase-1 ratings and phase-2 disbursement amounts. Furthermore, performance ratings are not replicable by external observers, both because subjective and discretionary decisions are made in the generation of performance measures and because the underlying data are not available. INTERPRETATION: The Global Fund's present performance-based funding system does not adequately convey incentives for performance to recipients, and the organisation should redesign this system to explicitly link a portion of the funds to a simple performance measure in health coverage or outcomes, measured independently and robustly. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.