Perceived consequences of healthcare service decentralization on access, affordability and quality of care in Khartoum locality, Sudan.

BACKGROUND: Decentralization of healthcare services has been widely utilized, especially in developing countries, to improve the performance of healthcare systems by increasing the access and efficiency of service delivery. Experiences have been variable secondary to disparities in financial and human resources, system capacity and community engagement. Sudan is no exception and understanding the perceived effect of decentralization on access, affordability, and quality of care among stakeholders is crucial. METHODS: This was a mixed method, cross-sectional, explorative study that involved 418 household members among catchment areas and 40 healthcare providers of Ibrahim Malik Hospital (IBMH) and Khartoum Teaching Hospital (KTH). Data was collected through a structured survey and in-depth interviews from July-December 2015. RESULTS: Access, affordability and quality of healthcare services were all perceived as worse, compared to before decentralization was implemented. Reported affordability was found to be 53 and 55% before decentralization compared to 24 to 16% after decentralization, within KTH and IBMH catchment areas respectively, (p = 0.01). The quality of healthcare services was reported to have declined from 47 and 38% before decentralization to 38 and 28% after, in KTH and IBMH respectively (p = 0.02). Accessibility was found to be more limited, with services being accessible before decentralization approximately 59 and 52% of the time, compared to 41 and 30% after, in KTH and IBMH catchment areas respectively, (p = 0.01). Accessibility to healthcare was reported to have decreased secondary to facility closures, reverse transference of services, and low capacity of devolved facilities. Lastly, privatized services were reported as strengthened in response to this decentralization of healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: The deterioration of access, affordability and quality of health services was experienced as the predominant perception among stakeholders after decentralization implementation. Our study results suggest there is an urgent need for a review of the current healthcare policies, structure and management within Sudan in order to provide evidence and insights regarding the impact of decentralization.

Exploring the consequences of decentralization: has privatization of health services been the perceived effect of decentralization in Khartoum locality, Sudan?

BACKGROUND: The health system of Sudan has experienced several forms of decentralization, as well as, a radical reform. Authority and governance of secondary and tertiary health facilities have been shifted from federal to state levels. Moreover, the provision of health care services have been moved from large federal tertiary level hospitals such as Khartoum Teaching Hospital (KTH) and Jafaar Ibnoaf Hospital (JIH), located in the center of Khartoum, to smaller district secondary hospitals like Ibrahim Malik (IBMH), which is located in the southern part of Khartoum. Exploring stakeholders' perceptions on this decentralisation implementation and its relevant consequences is vital in building an empirical benchmark for the improvement of health systems. METHODS: This study utilised a qualitative design which is comprised of in-depth interviews and qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach. The study was conducted between July and December 2015, and aimed at understanding the personal experiences and perceptions of stakeholders towards decentralisation enforcement and the implications on public health services, with a particular focus on the Khartoum locality. It involved community members residing in the Khartoum Locality, specifically in catchments area where hospital decentralisation was implemented, as well as, affiliated health workers and policymakers. RESULTS: The major finding suggested that privatisation of health services occurred after decentralisation. The study participants also highlighted that scrutiny and reduction of budgets allocated to health services led to an instantaneous enforcement of cost recovery user fee. Devolving KTH Khartoum Teaching and Jafar Ibnoaf Hospitals into peripherals with less. Capacity, was considered to be a plan to weaken public health services and outsource services to private sector. Another theme that was highlighted in hospitals included the profit-making aspect of the governmental sector in the form of drug supplying and profit-making retail. CONCLUSIONS: A change in health services after the enforcement of decentralisation was illustrated. Moreover, the incapacitation of public health systems and empowerment of the privatisation concept was the prevailing perception among stakeholders. Having contextualised in-depth studies and policy analysis in line with the global liberalisation and adjustment programmes is crucial for any health sector reform in Sudan.

Conflict and tuberculosis in Sudan: a 10-year review of the National Tuberculosis Programme, 2004-2014.

BACKGROUND: Sudan is a fragile developing country, with a low expenditure on health. It has been subjected to ongoing conflicts ever since 1956, with the Darfur crisis peaking in 2004. The conflict, in combination with the weak infrastructure, can lead to poor access to healthcare. Hence, this can cause an increased risk of infection, greater morbidity and mortality from tuberculosis (TB), especially amongst the poor, displaced and refugee populations. This study will be the first to describe TB case notifications, characteristics and outcomes over a ten-year period in Darfur in comparison with the non-conflict Eastern zones within Sudan. METHODS: A cross-sectional review of the National Tuberculosis Programme (NTP) data from 2004 to 2014 comparing the Darfur conflict zone with the non-conflict eastern zone. RESULTS: New case notifications were 52% lower in the conflict zone (21,131) compared to the non-conflict zone (43,826). Smear-positive pulmonary TB (PTB) in the conflict zone constituted 63% of all notified cases, compared to the non-conflict zone of 32% (p < 0.001). Extrapulmonary TB (EPTB) predominated the TB notified cases in the non-conflict zone, comprising 35% of the new cases versus 9% in the conflict zone (p < 0.001). The loss to follow up (LTFU) was high in both zones (7% conflict vs 10% non-conflict, p < 0.001) with a higher rate among re-treatment cases (12%) in the conflict zone. Average treatment success rates of smear-positive pulmonary TB (PTB), over ten years, were low (65-66%) in both zones. TB mortality among re-treatment cases was higher in the conflict zone (8%) compared to the non-conflict zone (6%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A low TB case notification was found in the conflict zone from 2004 to 2014. High loss to follow up and falling treatment success rates were found in both conflict and non-conflict zones, which represents a significant public health risk. Further analysis of the TB response and surveillance system in both zones is needed to confirm the factors associated with the poor outcomes. Using context-sensitive measures and simplified pathways with an emphasis on displaced persons may increase access and case notification in conflict zones, which can help avoid a loss to follow up in both zones.