Catastrophic costs for tuberculosis patients in India: Impact of methodological choices.

As financial risk protection is one of the goals towards universal health coverage, detailed information on costs, catastrophic costs and other economic consequences related to any disease are required for designing social protection measures. End Tuberculosis (TB) Strategy set a milestone of achieving zero catastrophic cost by 2020. However, a recent literature review noted that 7%-32% TB affected households in India faced catastrophic cost. Studies included in the review were small scale cross-sectional. We followed a cohort of 1482 notified drug-susceptible TB patients from four states in India: Assam, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal to provide a comprehensive picture of economic burden associated with TB treatment. Treatment cost was calculated using World Health Organization guidelines on TB patient cost survey and both human capital and output approaches of indirect cost (time, productivity, and income loss related to an episode) calculation were used to provide the range of households currently facing catastrophic cost. Depending on choice of indirect cost calculation method, 30%-61% study participants faced catastrophic cost. For over half of them, costs became catastrophic even before starting TB treatment as there was average 7-9 weeks delay from symptom onset to treatment initiation which was double the generally accepted delay of 4 weeks. During that period, they made average 8-11 visits to different providers and spent money on consultations, drugs, tests, and travel. Following the largest cohort of drug-susceptible TB patients till date, the study concluded that a significant proportion of study participants faced catastrophic cost and the proportion was much higher when income loss was considered as indirect cost calculation method. Therefore, ensuring uninterrupted livelihood during TB treatment is an absolute necessity. Another reason of high cost was the delay in diagnosis and costs incurred during pre-diagnosis period. This delay and consequently, economic burden, can be reduced by both supply side (intense private sector engagement, rapid diagnosis) and demand side (community engagement) initiatives. Reimbursement of expenses incurred before treatment initiation could be used as short-term measure for mitigating financial hardship.

One year of COVID-19 and its impact on private provider engagement for TB: A rapid assessment of intermediary NGOs in seven high TB burden countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted health systems and health programs across the world. For tuberculosis (TB), it is predicted to set back progress by at least twelve years. Public private mix (PPM)has made a vital contribution to reach End TB targets with a ten-fold rise in TB notifications from private providers between 2012 and 2019. This is due in large part to the efforts of intermediary agencies, which aggregate demand from private providers. The COVID-19 pandemic has put these gains at risk over the past year. In this rapid assessment, representatives of 15 intermediary agencies from seven countries that are considered the highest priority for PPM in TB care (the Big Seven) share their views on the impact of COVID-19 on their programs, the private providers operating under their PPM schemes, and their private TB clients. All intermediaries reported a drop in TB testing and notifications, and the closure of some private practices. While travel restrictions and the fear of contracting COVID-19 were the main contributing factors, there were also unanticipated expenses for private providers, which were transferred to patients via increased prices. Intermediaries also had their routine activities disrupted and had to shift tasks and budgets to meet the new needs. However, the intermediaries and their partners rapidly adapted, including an increased use of digital tools, patient-centric services, and ancillary support for private providers. Despite many setbacks, the COVID-19 pandemic has underlined the importance of effective private sector engagement. The robust approach to fight COVID-19 has shown the possibilities for ending TB with a similar approach, augmented by the digital revolution around treatment and diagnostics and the push to decentralize health services.

Quality of tuberculosis care in the private health sector.

As countries move towards achieving universal health coverage, efforts to engage all care providers have gained more significance. Over a third of people estimated to have developed TB in 2018 were not detected and notified by national TB programs (NTPs). This gap is more pronounced in countries with large private sectors, especially those with a high burden of TB. Health care providers outside the scope of NTPs, including the private and informal sector, are often the first point of care for TB patients. However, these providers are not fully engaged despite evidence from country experiences and projects that demonstrate increased detection and good treatment outcomes through publicprivate mix (PPM) approaches. While there are often concerns about quality of care in public facilities, there is also increasing evidence that quality of TB care in the private sector falls short of international standards in many places and urgently needs improvement. Failure to engage the full range of health care providers for TB has serious consequences in terms of access to quality care, resulting in increased transmission as a result of delayed diagnosis and treatment; excess mortality and morbidity as a result of inappropriate treatment; and increased drug resistance as a result of incomplete treatment. Recent attention to this issue has led to significant increases in private TB notifications, especially in India, Indonesia and the Philippines, but the gap between notification and the extension of quality program services for provision of treatment and care appears to be growing.

Roundtable discussion: what is the future role of the private sector in health?

BACKGROUND: The role for the private sector in health remains subject to much debate, especially within the context of achieving universal health coverage.This roundtable discussion offers diverse perspectives from a range of stakeholders--a health funder, a representative from an implementing organization, a national-level policy-maker, and an expert working in a large multi-national company--on what the future may hold for the private sector in health. DISCUSSION: The first perspective comes from a health funder, who argues that the discussion about the future role of the private sector has been bogged down in language. He argues for a 'both/and' approach rather than an 'either/or' when it comes to talking about health service provision in low- and middle-income countries.The second perspective is offered by an implementer of health insurance in sub-Saharan Africa. The piece examines the comparative roles of public sector actors, private sector actors and funding agencies, suggesting that they must work together to mobilize domestic resources to fund and deliver health services in the longer term.Thirdly, a special advisor working in the federal government of Nigeria considers the situation in that country. He notes that the private sector plays a significant role in funding and delivering health services there, and that the government must engage the private sector or forever be left behind.Finally, a representative from a multi-national pharmaceutical corporation gives an overview of global shifts that are creating opportunities for the private sector in health markets. SUMMARY: Overall, the roundtable discussants agree that the private sector will play an important role in future health systems. But we must agree a common language, work together, and identify key issues and gaps that might be more effectively filled by the private sector.

The impact of a hybrid social marketing intervention on inequities in access, ownership and use of insecticide-treated nets.

BACKGROUND: An ITN intervention was initiated in three predominantly rural districts of Eastern Province, Zambia, that lacked commercial distribution and communication infrastructures. Social marketing techniques were used for product and message development. Public sector clinics and village-based volunteers promoted and distributed subsidized ITNs priced at 2.5 dollars per net. A study was conducted to assess the effects of the intervention on inequities in knowledge, access, ownership and use of ITNs. METHODS: A post-test only quasi-experimental study design was used to compare intervention and comparison districts. A total of 2,986 respondents were interviewed. Survey respondents were grouped into four socio-economic (SES) categories: low, medium-low, medium and high. Knowledge, access, ownership and use indicators are compared. Concentration index scores are calculated. Interactions between intervention status and SES help determine how different SES groups benefited from the intervention. RESULTS: Although overall use of nets remained relatively low, post-test data show that knowledge, access, ownership and use of mosquito nets was higher in intervention districts. A decline in SES inequity in access to nets occurred in intervention districts, resulting from a disproportionately greater increase in access among the low SES group. Declines in SES inequities in net ownership and use of nets were associated with the intervention. The largest increases in net ownership and use occurred among medium and high SES categories. CONCLUSION: Increasing access to nets among the poorest respondents in rural areas may not lead to increases in net use unless the price of nets is no longer a barrier to their purchase.