Developing and implementing National Health Insurance: learnings from the first try in Benin.

In 2008, Benin government launched a national health insurance scheme, but this had been suspended in 2017. We aim to understand how existing ideas and institutions, stakeholders' behaviour and their interests shaped policy-making process and policy content, from its launch to its suspension. METHODS: We used a case study design, framed by the policy triangle of Walt and Gilson. We collected data through document review, quantitative data extraction from routine information, and interviews with 20 key informants. We performed a content analysis using both complementarily deductive and inductive analysis. RESULTS: This study confirms the keen interest for national health insurance scheme in Benin among various stakeholders. Compared with user fee exemption policies, it is considered as more sustainable, with a more reliable financing, and a greater likelihood to facilitate population's access to quality healthcare without financial hardships.Exempting the poor from paying health insurance premiums was however considered as an equitable mean to facilitate the extension of the health insurance to informal sector workers.The whole arrangements failed to deliver appropriate skills, tools, coordination and incentives to drive the policy implementers to make individual and organisational changes necessary to adjust to the objectives and values of the reform. These deficiencies compromised the implementation fidelity with unintended effects such as low subscription rate, low services utilisation and sustainability threats. CONCLUSION: Supporting countries in documenting policy processes will ease learning across their tries for progressing towards Universal Health Coverage, as more than one try will be necessary.

"So hard not to feel blamed!": Assessment of implementation of Benin's Maternal and Perinatal Death Surveillance and Response strategy from 2016-2018.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the implementation of the Maternal and Perinatal Death Surveillance and Response (MPDSR) strategy institutionalized in Benin in 2013 to address the alarmingly high maternal and neonatal death rates. METHODS: A retrospective, mixed-methods study was performed. We used all maternal and neonatal death notifications and reviews from 2016 to 2018, reviewed the reports of 63 MPDSR working groups, and held two online group discussions. Descriptive quantitative analysis was performed, and content analysis was applied to qualitative data. RESULTS: Deaths were under-notified, with estimated notification rates at 46%-48% for maternal and 16%-21% for neonatal deaths over the 3 years. Review completion rates were low, corresponding to 50%-56% of maternal and 8%-17% of neonatal deaths. Causes of undernotification included very low notification of community-based and private health facility deaths, and fear of blame. Low review completion rates were due to heavy workload, staffing shortages, fear of blame, and weak leadership. Moreover, reviews were of poor quality and the response was weak. CONCLUSION: Maternal and Perinatal Death Surveillance and Response is operational in Benin. However, this assessment highlights the need to strengthen the notification strategy, continuously build MPDSR committee members' capacities, engage decision-makers for an effective response, and create a better blame-free, accountable, and learning culture.

Political economy analysis of universal health coverage and health financing reforms in low- and middle-income countries: the role of stakeholder engagement in the research process.

BACKGROUND: Progress towards universal health coverage (UHC) is an inherently political process. Political economy analysis (PEA) is gaining momentum as a tool to better understand the role of the political and economic dimensions in shaping and achieving UHC in different contexts. Despite the acknowledged importance of actors and stakeholders in political economy considerations, their role in the PEA research process beyond "study subjects" as potential cocreators of knowledge and knowledge users has been overlooked so far. We therefore aimed to review the approaches with reference to stakeholder engagement during the research process adopted in the current published research on the political economy of UHC and health financing reforms, and the factors favouring (or hindering) uptake and usability of PEA work. METHODS: We reviewed the literature to describe whether, when and how stakeholders were involved in the research process of studies looking at the political economy of UHC and health financing reforms, and to identify challenges and lessons learned on effective stakeholder engagement and research uptake. We used a standardized search strategy with key terms across several databases; we screened and included articles that focused on PEA and UHC. Additionally, we conducted a short survey of the authors of the included studies to complement the information retrieved. RESULTS: Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. We found overall little evidence of systematic engagement of stakeholders in the research process, which focused mostly on the data collection phase of the research (i.e., key informant interviews). Our study identifies some reasons for the varying stakeholder engagement. Challenges include PEA requiring specific skills, a focus on sensitive issues, and the blurriness in researchers' and stakeholders' roles and the multiple roles of stakeholders as research participants, study subjects and research users. Among the approaches that might favour usability of PEA work, we identified early engagement, coproduction of research questions, local partners and personal contact, political willingness, and trust and use of prospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholder engagement and research uptake are multifaceted concepts and complex processes, particularly when applied to PEA. As such, stakeholder engagement in the research process of PEA of UHC and health financing reforms is limited and underreported. Despite the challenges, however, stakeholder engagement remains key to ensuring relevance, usability and research uptake of PEA studies. More efforts are required to ensure engagement at different stages of the research process and better reporting in published articles.