Demands for Intersectoral Actions to Meet Health Challenges in East and Southern Africa and Methods for Their Evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Focusing on the East, Central, and Southern African region, this study examines both regional and country-level initiatives aimed at promoting multisectoral collaboration to improve population health and the methods for their economic evaluation. METHODS: We explored the interventions that necessitate cooperation among policymakers from diverse sectors and the mechanisms that facilitate effective collaboration and coordination across these sectors. To gain insights into the demand for multisectoral collaboration in the East, Central, and Southern African region, we presented 3 country briefs, highlighting policy areas and initiatives that have successfully incorporated health-promoting actions from outside the health sector in Zimbabwe, Uganda, and Malawi. Additionally, we showcased initiatives undertaken by the Ministry of Health in each country to foster coordination with national and international stakeholders, along with existing coordination mechanisms established for intersectoral collaboration. Drawing on these examples, we identified the primary challenges in the economic evaluation of multisectoral programs aimed at improving health in the region. RESULTS: We illustrated how decision making in reality differs from the traditional single-sector and single-decision-maker perspective commonly used in cost-effectiveness analyses. To ensure economic evaluations can inform decision making in diverse settings and facilitate regional collaboration, we highlighted 3 fundamental principles: identifying policy objectives, defining the perspective of the analysis, and considering opportunity costs. We emphasized the importance of adopting a flexible and context-specific approach to economic evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Through this work, we contribute to bridging the gap between theory and practice in the context of intersectoral activities aimed at improving health outcomes.

How viable is social health insurance for financing health in Zambia? Results from a national willingness to pay survey.

In an era of considerable uncertainty about future prospects for development assistance to fund major health programmes in Sub-Saharan Africa, social health insurance is increasingly being considered as an alternative mechanism for increasing financing health. However, empirical support for social health insurance in sub-Saharan Africa remains sparse. The main aim of this study was to examine the viability of increasing health financing through social health insurance in Zambia. The paper uses a large nationally representative household survey to estimate the expected mean and total willingness to pay for social health insurance. The revenue potential of social health insurance for health sector funding is assessed. The results show that despite a high level of public support for social health insurance, with 80% willing to join a social insurance scheme, the estimated mean monthly willingness-to-pay is relatively low at Zambian Kwacha 55 (US$8.8 in 2014 dollars) per household. The evidence presented in this paper suggests that the revenue potential of social health insurance would not be sufficient to fund major improvements in quality of care for insured members, let alone cross-subsidize benefits to non-members.

Hardship financing of out-of-pocket payments in the context of free healthcare in Zambia.

Despite the removal of user fees on public primary healthcare in Zambia, prior studies suggest that out-of-pocket payments are still significant. However, we have little understanding of the extent to which out-of-pocket payments lead patients to hardship methods of financing out-of-pocket costs. This study analyses the prevalence and determinants of hardship financing arising from out-of-pocket payments in healthcare, using data from a nationally-representative household health expenditure survey conducted in 2014. We employ a sequential logistic regression model to examine the factors associated with the risk of hardship financing conditional on reporting an illness and an out-of-pocket expenditure. The results show that up to 11% of households who reported an illness had borrowed money, or sold items or asked a friend for help, or displaced other household consumption in order to pay for health care. The risk of hardship financing was higher among the poorest households, female headed-households and households who reside further from health facilities. Improvements in physical access and quality of public health services have the potential to reduce the incidence of hardship financing especially among the poorest.

Myriad of Health Care Financing Reforms in Zambia: Have the Poor Benefited?

Zambia has implemented a number of financing and organizational reforms since the 1990s aimed at increasing efficiency, enhancing equity, and improving health outcomes. This study reviews the distributional impact of these health reforms on enhancing equity at the regional level and for different socioeconomic groups. Data from three nationally representative household surveys were collected, and a benefit incidence analysis was conducted to determine the distributional impact over the period 2010-2015. The results show that distribution of subsidies and utilization of outpatient services at public health facilities in Zambia has consistently been in favor of urban provinces. Further, distribution of health subsidies across the ten provinces in Zambia does not correspond to reported illnesses in each province. The study also shows that utilization of outpatient services at public (hospitals and health centers) and private health facilities is generally in favor of the rich, and utilization of both inpatient and outpatient services at public and private health facilities benefits the rich more than the poor. And although the results show a pro-poor redistribution of benefits across income groups in 2015 compared to 2010 whereby the poorest two income groups received more than a 20% share of benefits in each quintile, the benefits were still lower than their health needs. This is contrary to the richest two income groups whose share of benefits was higher than their health needs in both 2010 and 2015. The study concludes that Zambia has not yet fully attained its long-term health reform vision of "equity of access to quality health care" despite years of successive health reforms. The study calls for the Zambian government to complement strategies on financial risk protection with deliberate supply- and demand-side actions in order to enhance equity. Improvements in long- and short-term planning and regular monitoring and evaluation are critical.

Determinants of Healthcare Utilisation and Out-of-Pocket Payments in the Context of Free Public Primary Healthcare in Zambia.

BACKGROUND: Access to appropriate and affordable healthcare is needed to achieve better health outcomes in Africa. However, access to healthcare remains low, especially among the poor. In Zambia, poor access exists despite the policy by the government to remove user fees in all primary healthcare facilities in the public sector. The paper has two main objectives: (i) to examine the factors associated with healthcare choices among sick people, and (ii) to assess the determinants of the magnitude of out-of-pocket (OOP) payments related to a visit to a health provider. METHODS: This paper employs a multilevel multinomial logistic regression to model the determinants of an individual's choice of healthcare options following an illness. Further, the study analyses the drivers of the magnitude of OOP expenditure related to a visit to a health provider using a two-part generalised linear model. The analysis is based on a nationally representative healthcare utilisation and expenditure survey that was conducted in 2014. RESULTS: Household per capita consumption expenditure is significantly associated with increased odds of seeking formal care (odds ratio [OR] = 1.12, P = .000). Living in a household in which the head has a higher level of education is associated with increased odds of seeking formal healthcare (OR = 1.54, P = .000) and (OR = 1.55, P = .01), for secondary and tertiary education, respectively. Rural residence is associated with reduced odds of seeking formal care (OR = 0.706, P = .002). The magnitude of OOP expenditure during a visit is significantly dependent on household economic well-being, distance from a health facility, among other factors. A 10% increase in per capita consumption expenditure was associated with a 0.2% increase in OOP health expenditure while every kilometre travelled was associated with a K0.51 increase in OOP health expenditure. CONCLUSION: Despite the removal of user fees on public primary healthcare in Zambia, access to healthcare is highly dependent on an individual's socio-economic status, illness type and region of residence. These findings also suggest that the benefits of free public healthcare may not reach the poorest proportionately, which raise implications for increasing access in Zambia and other countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

Does User Fee Removal Policy Provide Financial Protection from Catastrophic Health Care Payments? Evidence from Zambia.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-pocket payments in health care have been shown to impose significant burden on households in Sub-Saharan Africa, leading to constrained access to health care and impoverishment. In an effort to reduce the financial burden imposed on households by user fees, some countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have abolished user fees in the health sector. Zambia is one of few countries in Sub-Saharan Africa to abolish user fees in primary health care facilities with a view to alleviating financial burden of out-of-pocket payments among the poor. The main aim of this paper was to examine the extent and patterns of financial protection from fees following the decision to abolish user fees in public primary health facilities. METHODS: Our analysis is based on a nationally representative health expenditure and utilization survey conducted in 2014. We calculated the incidence and intensity of catastrophic health expenditure based on households' out-of-pocket payments during a visit as a percentage of total household consumption expenditure. We further show the intensity of the problem of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) experienced by households. RESULTS: Our analysis show that following the removal of user fees, a majority of patients who visited public health facilities benefitted from free care at the point of use. Further, seeking care at public primary health facilities is associated with a reduced likelihood of incurring CHE after controlling for economic wellbeing and other covariates. However, 10% of households are shown to suffer financial catastrophe as a result of out-of-pocket payments. Further, there is considerable inequality in the incidence of CHE whereby the poorest expenditure quintile experienced a much higher incidence. CONCLUSION: Despite the removal of user fees at primary health care level, CHE is high among the poorest sections of the population. This study also shows that cost of transportation is mainly responsible for limiting the protective effectiveness of user fee removal on CHE among particularly poorest households.