Incidence of catastrophic health spending in Indonesia: insights from a Household Panel Study 2018-2019.

BACKGROUND: Indonesia implemented one of the world's largest single-payer national health insurance schemes (the Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional or JKN) in 2014. This study aims to assess the incidence of catastrophic health spending (CHS) and its determinants and trends between 2018 and 2019 by which time JKN enrolment coverage exceeded 80%. METHODS: This study analysed data collected from a two-round cross-sectional household survey conducted in ten provinces of Indonesia in February-April 2018 and August-October 2019. The incidence of CHS was defined as the proportion of households with out-of-pocket (OOP) health spending exceeding 10% of household consumption expenditure. Chi-squared tests were used to compare the incidences of CHS across subgroups for each household characteristic. Logistic regression models were used to investigate factors associated with incurring CHS and the trend over time. Sensitivity analyses assessing the incidence of CHS based on a higher threshold of 25% of total household expenditure were conducted. RESULTS: The overall incidence of CHS at the 10% threshold fell from 7.9% to 2018 to 4.4% in 2019. The logistic regression models showed that households with JKN membership experienced significantly lower incidence of CHS compared to households without insurance coverage in both years. The poorest households were more likely to incur CHS compared to households in other wealth quintiles. Other predictors of incurring CHS included living in rural areas and visiting private health facilities. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the overall incidence of CHS decreased in Indonesia between 2018 and 2019. OOP payments for health care and the risk of CHS still loom high among JKN members and among the lowest income households. More needs to be done to further contain OOP payments and further research is needed to investigate whether CHS pushes households below the poverty line.

The benefits and burden of health financing in Indonesia: analyses of nationally representative cross-sectional data.

BACKGROUND: Indonesia has committed to deliver universal health coverage by 2024. Reforming the country's health-financing system is key to achieving this commitment. We aimed to evaluate how the benefits and burden of health financing are distributed across income groups and the extent to which Indonesia has achieved equity in the funding and delivery of health care after financing reforms. METHODS: We conducted benefit incidence analyses (BIA) and financing incidence analyses (FIA) using cross-sectional nationally representative data from several datasets. Two waves (Feb 1 to April 30, 2018, and Aug 1 to Oct 31, 2019) of the Equity and Health Care Financing in Indonesia (ENHANCE) study household survey involving 7500 households from ten of the 34 provinces in Indonesia were used to obtain health and socioeconomic status data for the BIA. Two waves (2018 and 2019) of the National Socioeconomic Survey (SUSENAS), the most recent wave (2014) of the Indonesian Family Life Survey, and the 2017 and 2018 National Health Accounts were used to obtain data for the FIA. In the BIA, we calculated a concentration index to assess the distribution of health-care benefits (-1·0 [pro-poor] to 1·0 [pro-rich]), considering potential differences in health-care need. In the FIA, we evaluated the equity of health-financing contributions by socioeconomic quintiles by calculating the Kakwani index to assess the relative progressivity of each financing source. Both the BIA and FIA compared results from early 2018 (baseline) with results from late 2019. FINDINGS: There were 31 864 participants in the ENHANCE survey in 2018 compared with 31 215 in 2019. Women constituted 50·5% and men constituted 49·5% of the total participants for each year. SUSENAS had 1 131 825 participants in 2018 compared with 1 204 466 in 2019. Women constituted 49·9% of the participants for each year, whereas men constituted 51·1%. The distribution of health-care benefits in the public sector was marginally pro-poor; people with low income received a greater proportion of benefits from health services than people with high income between 2018 (concentration index -0·008, 95% CI -0·075 to 0·059) and 2019 (-0·060, -0·139 to 0·019). The benefit incidence in the private health sector was significantly pro-rich in 2018 (0·134, 0·065 to 0·203, p=0·0010) and 2019 (0·190, -0·192 to 0·572, p=0·0070). Health-financing incidence changed from being moderately progressive in 2018 (Kakwani index 0·034, 95% CI 0·030 to 0·038) to mildly regressive in 2019 (-0·030, -0·034 to -0·025). INTERPRETATION: Although Indonesia has made substantial progress in expanding health-care coverage, a lot remains to be done to improve equity in financing and spending. Improving comprehensiveness of benefits will reduce out-of-pocket spending and allocating more funding to primary care would improve access to health-care services for people with low income. FUNDING: UK Health Systems Research Initiative, UK Department of International Development, UK Economic and Social Research Council, UK Medical Research Council, and Wellcome Trust.

Using measures of quality of care to assess equity in health care funding for primary care: analysis of Indonesian household data.

BACKGROUND: Many countries implementing pro-poor reforms to expand subsidized health care, especially for the poor, recognize that high-quality healthcare, and not just access alone, is necessary to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. As the poor are more likely to use low quality health services, measures to improve access to health care need to emphasise quality as the cornerstone to achieving equity goals. Current methods to evaluate health systems financing equity fail to take into account measures of quality. This paper aims to provide a worked example of how to adapt a popular quantitative approach, Benefit Incidence Analysis (BIA), to incorporate a quality weighting into the computation of public subsidies for health care. METHODS: We used a dataset consisting of a sample of households surveyed in 10 provinces of Indonesia in early-2018. In parallel, a survey of public health facilities was conducted in the same geographical areas, and information about health facility infrastructure and basic equipment was collected. In each facility, an index of service readiness was computed as a measure of quality. Individuals who reported visiting a primary health care facility in the month before the interview were matched to their chosen facility. Standard BIA and an extended BIA that adjusts for service quality were conducted. RESULTS: Quality scores were relatively high across all facilities, with an average of 82%. Scores for basic equipment were highest, with an average score of 99% compared to essential medicines with an average score of 60%. Our findings from the quality-weighted BIA show that the distribution of subsidies for public primary health care facilities became less 'pro-poor' while private clinics became more 'pro-rich' after accounting for quality of care. Overall the distribution of subsidies became significantly pro-rich (CI = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Routine collection of quality indicators that can be linked to individuals is needed to enable a comprehensive understanding of individuals' pathways of care. From a policy perspective, accounting for quality of care in health financing assessment is crucial in a context where quality of care is a nationwide issue. In such a context, any health financing performance assessment is likely to be biased if quality is not accounted for.

Equity of health financing in Indonesia: A 5-year financing incidence analysis (2015-2019).

BACKGROUND: In 2014, Indonesia launched a single payer national health insurance scheme with the aim of covering the entire population by 2024. The objective of this paper is to assess the equity with which contributions to the health financing system were distributed in Indonesia over 2015 - 2019. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Socioeconomic Survey of Indonesia (2015 - 2019). The relative progressivity of each health financing source and overall health financing was determined using a summary score, the Kakwani index. FINDINGS: Around a third of health financing was sourced from out-of-pocket (OOP) payments each year, with direct taxes, indirect taxes and social health insurance (SHI) each taking up 15 - 20%. Direct taxes and OOP payments were progressive sources of health financing, and indirect tax payments regressive, for all of 2015 - 2019. SHI contributions were regressive except in 2017 and 2018. The overall health financing system was progressive from 2015 to 2018, but this declined year by year and became mildly regressive in 2019. INTERPRETATION: The declining progressivity of the overall health financing system between 2015 - 2019 suggests that Indonesia still has a way to go in developing a fair and equitable health financing system that ensures the poor are financially protected. FUNDING: This study is supported through the Health Systems Research Initiative in the UK, and is jointly funded by the Department of International Development, the Economic and Social Research Council, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust.

Poor quality for the poor? A study of inequalities in service readiness and provider knowledge in Indonesian primary health care facilities.

BACKGROUND: For many low and middle-income countries poor quality health care is now responsible for a greater number of deaths than insufficient access to care. This has in turn raised concerns around the distribution of quality of care in LMICs: do the poor have access to lower quality health care compared to the rich? The aim of this study is to investigate the extent of inequalities in the availability of quality health services across the Indonesian health system with a particular focus on differences between care delivered in the public and private sectors. METHODS: Using the Indonesian Family Life Survey (wave 5, 2015), 15,877 households in 312 communities were linked with a representative sample of both public and private health facilities available in the same communities. Quality of health facilities was assessed using both a facility service readiness score and a knowledge score constructed using clinical vignettes. Ordinary least squares regression models were used to investigate the determinants of quality in public and private health facilities. RESULTS: In both sectors, inequalities in both quality scores existed between major islands. In public facilities, inequalities in readiness scores persisted between rural and urban areas, and to a lesser extent between rich and poor communities. CONCLUSION: In order to reach the ambitious stated goal of reaching Universal Health Coverage in Indonesia, priority should be given to redressing current inequalities in the quality of care.

Two decades of antenatal and delivery care in Uganda: a cross-sectional study using Demographic and Health Surveys.

BACKGROUND: Uganda halved its maternal mortality to 343/100,000 live births between 1990 and 2015, but did not meet the Millennium Development Goal 5. Skilled, timely and good quality antenatal (ANC) and delivery care can prevent the majority of maternal/newborn deaths and stillbirths. We examine coverage, equity, sector of provision and content of ANC and delivery care between 1991 and 2011. METHODS: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study using four Uganda Demographic and Health Surveys (1995, 2000, 2006 and 2011).Using the most recent live birth and adjusting for survey sampling, we estimated percentage and absolute number of births with ANC (any and 4+ visits), facility delivery, caesarean sections and complete maternal care. We assessed socio-economic differentials in these indicators by wealth, education, urban/rural residence, and geographic zone on the 1995 and 2011 surveys. We estimated the proportions of ANC and delivery care provided by the public and private (for-profit and not-for-profit) sectors, and compared content of ANC and delivery care between sectors. Statistical significance of differences were evaluated using chi-square tests. RESULTS: Coverage with any ANC remained high over the study period (> 90% since 2001) but was of insufficient frequency; < 50% of women who received any ANC reported 4+ visits. Facility-based delivery care increased slowly, reaching 58% in 2011. While significant inequalities in coverage by wealth, education, residence and geographic zone remained, coverage improved for all indicators among the lowest socio-economic groups of women over time. The private sector market share declined over time to 14% of ANC and 25% of delivery care in 2011. Only 10% of women with 4+ ANC visits and 13% of women delivering in facilities received all measured care components. CONCLUSIONS: The Ugandan health system had to cope with more than 30,000 additional births annually between 1991 and 2011. The majority of women in Uganda accessed ANC, but this contact did not result in care of sufficient frequency, content, and continuum of care (facility delivery). Providers in both sectors require quality improvements. Achieving universal health coverage and maternal/newborn SDGs in Uganda requires prioritising poor, less educated and rural women despite competing priorities for financial and human resources.

Process evaluation of a social franchising model to improve maternal health: evidence from a multi-methods study in Uttar Pradesh, India.

BACKGROUND: A prominent strategy to engage private sector health providers in low- and middle-income countries is clinical social franchising, an organisational model that applies the principles of commercial franchising for socially beneficial goals. The Matrika programme, a multi-faceted social franchise model to improve maternal health, was implemented in three districts of Uttar Pradesh, India, between 2013 and 2016. Previous research indicates that the intervention was not effective in improving the quality and coverage of maternal health services at the population level. This paper reports findings from an independent external process evaluation, conducted alongside the impact evaluation, with the aim of explaining the impact findings. It focuses on the main component of the programme, the "Sky" social franchise. METHODS: We first developed a theory of change, mapping the key mechanisms through which the programme was hypothesised to have impact. We then undertook a multi-methods study, drawing on both quantitative and qualitative primary data from a wide range of sources to assess the extent of implementation and to understand mechanisms of impact and the role of contextual factors. We analysed the quantitative data descriptively to generate indicators of implementation. We undertook a thematic analysis of the qualitative data before holding reflective meetings to triangulate across data sources, synthesise evidence, and identify the main findings. Finally, we used the framework provided by the theory of change to organise and interpret our findings. RESULTS: We report six key findings. First, despite the franchisor achieving its recruitment targets, the competitive nature of the market for antenatal care meant social franchise providers achieved very low market share. Second, all Sky health providers were branded but community awareness of the franchise remained low. Third, using lower-level providers and community health volunteers to encourage women to attend franchised antenatal care services was ineffective. Fourth, referral linkages were not sufficiently strong between antenatal care providers in the franchise network and delivery care providers. Fifth, Sky health providers had better knowledge and self-reported practice than comparable health providers, but overall, the evidence pointed to poor quality of care across the board. Finally, telemedicine was perceived by clients as an attractive feature, but problems in the implementation of the technology meant its effect on quality of antenatal care was likely limited. CONCLUSIONS: These findings point towards the importance of designing programmes based on a strong theory of change, understanding market conditions and what patients value, and rigorously testing new technologies. The design of future social franchising programmes should take account of the challenges documented in this and other evaluations.

An evaluation of health systems equity in Indonesia: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Many low and middle income countries are implementing reforms to support Universal Health Coverage (UHC). Perhaps one of the most ambitious examples of this is Indonesia's national health scheme known as the JKN which is designed to make health care available to its entire population of 255 million by end of 2019. If successful, the JKN will be the biggest single payer system in the world. While Indonesia has made steady progress, around a third of its population remains without cover and out of pocket payments for health are widespread even among JKN members. To help close these gaps, especially among the poor, the Indonesian government is currently implementing a set of UHC policy reforms that include the integration of remaining government insurance schemes into the JKN, expansion of provider networks, restructuring of provider payments systems, accreditation of all contracted health facilities and a range of demand side initiatives to increase insurance uptake, especially in the informal sector. This study evaluates the equity impact of this latest set of UHC reforms. METHODS: Using a before and after design, we will evaluate the combined effects of the national UHC reforms at baseline (early 2018) and target of JKN full implementation (end 2019) on: progressivity of the health care financing system; pro-poorness of the health care delivery system; levels of catastrophic and impoverishing health expenditure; and self-reported health outcomes. In-depth interviews with stakeholders to document the context and the process of implementing these reforms, will also be undertaken. DISCUSSION: As countries like Indonesia focus on increasing coverage, it is critically important to ensure that the poor and vulnerable - who are often the most difficult to reach - are not excluded. The results of this study will not only help track Indonesia's progress to universalism but also reveal what the UHC-reforms mean to the poor.

How equitable is social franchising? Case studies of three maternal healthcare franchises in Uganda and India.

Substantial investments have been made in clinical social franchising to improve quality of care of private facilities in low- and middle-income countries but concerns have emerged that the benefits fail to reach poorer groups. We assessed the distribution of franchise utilization and content of care by socio-economic status (SES) in three maternal healthcare social franchises in Uganda and India (Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan). We surveyed 2179 women who had received antenatal care (ANC) and/or delivery services at franchise clinics (in Uttar Pradesh only ANC services were offered). Women were allocated to national (Uganda) or state (India) SES quintiles. Franchise users were concentrated in the higher SES quintiles in all settings. The percent in the top two quintiles was highest in Uganda (over 98% for both ANC and delivery), followed by Rajasthan (62.8% for ANC, 72.1% for delivery) and Uttar Pradesh (48.5% for ANC). The percent of clients in the lowest two quintiles was zero in Uganda, 7.1 and 3.1% for ANC and delivery, respectively, in Rajasthan and 16.3% in Uttar Pradesh. Differences in SES distribution across the programmes may reflect variation in user fees, the average SES of the national/state populations and the range of services covered. We found little variation in content of care by SES. Key factors limiting the ability of such maternal health social franchises to reach poorer groups may include the lack of suitable facilities in the poorest areas, the inability of the poorest women to afford any private sector fees and competition with free or even incentivized public sector services. Moreover, there are tensions between targeting poorer groups, and franchise objectives of improving quality and business performance and enhancing financial sustainability, meaning that middle income and poorer groups are unlikely to be reached in large numbers in the absence of additional subsidies.