The redistributive effect of the public health system: the case of Sierra Leone.

Universal health coverage (UHC), health equity and reduction of income inequalities are key objectives for the Sierra Leone government. While investing in health systems may drive economic growth, it is less clear whether investing in health systems reduces income inequality. Therefore, a crucial issue is to what extent the Sierra Leone public healthcare system reduces income inequality, and finances and provides healthcare services equitably. We use data from the Sierra Leone Integrated Household Survey 2018 to complete a financing and benefit incidence analysis of the Sierra Leone public healthcare system. We extend these analyses by assessing the redistributive effect of the public healthcare system (i.e. fiscal incidence analysis). We compute the redistributive effect as the change in Gini index induced by the payments for, and provision of, public healthcare services. The financing incidence of the Sierra Leone public healthcare system is marginally progressive (i.e. Kakwani index: 0.011*, P-value <0.1). With regard to public healthcare benefits, while primary healthcare (PHC) benefits are pro-poor, secondary/tertiary benefits are pro-rich. The result is that overall public healthcare benefits are equally distributed (concentration index (CI): 0.008, not statistically different from zero). However, needs are concentrated among the poor, so benefits are pro-rich when needs are considered. We find that the public healthcare system redistributes resources from better-off quintiles to worse-off quintiles (Gini coefficient reduction induced by public healthcare system = 0.5%). PHC receives less financing than secondary/tertiary care but delivers a larger reduction in income inequality. The Sierra Leone public healthcare system redistributes resources and reduces income inequality. However, the redistributive effect occurs largely thanks to PHC services being markedly pro-poor, and the Sierra Leone health system could be more equitable. Policy-makers interested in improving Sierra Leone public health system equity and reducing income inequalities should prioritize PHC investments.

Has Ebola delayed progress on access to routine care and financial protection in Sierra Leone? Evidence from a difference-in-differences analysis with propensity score weighting.

INTRODUCTION: Covid-19 has highlighted the need to understand the long-term impact of epidemics on health systems. There is extensive evidence that the Ebola epidemic of 2014-16 dramatically reduced coverage of key reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (RMNCAH) indicators during the period of acute crisis in Sierra Leone. However, less is known about the longer lasting effects, and whether patients continue to be deterred from seeking care either through fear or cost some years after the end of the epidemic METHODS: We analysed nationally representative household surveys from before (2011) and after (2018) the Ebola epidemic to estimate the coverage of 11 indicators of access to RMNCAH, and affordability of care. We used a differences-in-differences analysis, exploiting the variation in epidemic intensity across chiefdoms, to identify the effect of epidemic intensity on access and affordability outcomes, with propensity score weighting to adjust for differences in underlying characteristics between chiefdoms. RESULTS: 13537 households were included across both datasets. Epidemic intensity was associated with a significant stalling in progress (-12.2 percentage points, 95% CI: 23.2 to -1.3, p = 0.029) in the proportion of births attended by a skilled provider. Epidemic intensity did not have a significant impact on any other indicator. CONCLUSION: While there is evidence that chiefdoms which experienced worse Ebola outbreaks had poorer coverage of attendance of skilled providers at birth than would have otherwise been expected, more broadly the intensity of the epidemic did not impact on most indicators. This suggests the measures to restore both staffing and trust were effective in supporting the health system to recover from Ebola.