Stakeholders' perspectives and willingness to institutionalize linkages between the formal health system and informal healthcare providers in urban slums in southeast, Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: The widely available informal healthcare providers (IHPs) present opportunities to improve access to appropriate essential health services in underserved urban areas in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, they are not formally linked to the formal health system. This study was conducted to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders about institutionalizing linkages between the formal health systems and IHPs, as a strategy for improving access to appropriate healthcare services in Nigeria. METHODS: Data was collected from key stakeholders in the formal and informal health systems, whose functions cover the major slums in Enugu and Onitsha cities in southeast Nigeria. Key informant interviews (n = 43) were conducted using semi-structured interview guides among representatives from the formal and informal health sectors. Interview transcripts were read severally, and using thematic content analysis, recurrent themes were identified and used for a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Although the dominant view among respondents is that formalization of linkages between IHPs and the formal health system will likely create synergy and quality improvement in health service delivery, anxieties and defensive pessimism were equally expressed. On the one hand, formal sector respondents are pessimistic about limited skills, poor quality of care, questionable recognition, and the enormous challenges of managing a pluralistic health system. Conversely, the informal sector pessimists expressed uncertainty about the outcomes of a government-led supervision and the potential negative impact on their practice. Some of the proposed strategies for institutionalizing linkages between the two health sub-systems include: sensitizing relevant policymakers and gatekeepers to the necessity of pluralistic healthcare; mapping and documenting of informal providers and respective service their areas for registration and accreditation, among others. Perceived threats to institutionalizing these linkages include: weak supervision and monitoring of informal providers by the State Ministry of Health due to lack of funds for logistics; poor data reporting and late referrals from informal providers; lack of referral feedback from formal to informal providers, among others. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities and constraints to institutionalize linkages between the formal health system and IHPs exist in Nigeria. However, there is a need to design an inclusive system that ensures tolerance, dignity, and mutual learning for all stakeholders in the country and in other LMICs.

Was the Maternal Health Cash Transfer Programme in Nigeria Sustainable and Cost-Effective?

Background: The Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme (SURE-P), Maternal and Child Health (MCH) was introduced by the Nigerian government to increase the use of skilled maternal health services and reduce maternal mortality. The programme, funded out of a reduction in the fuel subsidy, was implemented between October 2012 and April 2015 and incorporated a conditional cash transfer to women to encourage use of facility based maternal services. We seek to assess the incremental cost effectiveness and long term impact of the conditional cash transfer element of the programme. Methods: An impact analysis and incremental cost-effectiveness analysis of conditional cash transfers (CCTs) is undertaken taking a health service perspective toward costs of the intervention. The study was undertaken in Anambra state, comparing areas that received only the investment in health services with areas that implemented the conditional cash transfer programme. An interrupted time series analysis of the programme outputs was undertaken. These were combined with a programme costing to determine the incremental cost per output. Findings: Maternal services provided to patients in conditional cash transfer areas accelerated rapidly from the middle of 2014 until after the programme in late 2015. The costs of providing services in each Primary Health Center facility was US $52,128 in the areas that only invested in health services compared to US $90,702 in facilities that also provided cash transfers. Much of the additional cost was in managing cash transfers. The incremental cost in the cash transfer areas was $572 for delivery care and $11 for antenatal care. If the programme was to be integrated as a regular service in the public health system, the cost of a delivery is estimated to fall to $389 and to $188 if 2015 levels of activity are assumed. Conclusion: Although the cost of CCTs as originally constituted as a vertical programme are relatively high compared to other similar programmes, these would fall substantially if integrated into the main health system. There is also evidence of sustained impact beyond the end of the funding suggesting that short term programmes can lead to a long-term change in patterns of health seeking behavior.

Exploring issues in caregivers and parent communication of sexual and reproductive health matters with adolescents in Ebonyi state, Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Parent-child communication is an effective tool for fostering healthy sexual and reproductive behaviours among adolescents. However, the topic is underexplored in Nigeria. This study examines how parents and caregivers communicate sexual and reproductive health-related matters with adolescents aged 13-18 years in Nigeria. METHOD: The study was undertaken in six communities in Ebonyi state, Nigeria using quantitative and qualitative research methods. Data were collected through, i) cluster randomized survey of 1057 adolescents aged 13-18 years, ii) twelve sex-disaggregated focus group discussions with adolescents aged 13 to 18 years, and iii) eight in-depth interviews with parents and caregivers. Univariate and bivariate analysis were performed for quantitative data, while qualitative data were analysed using thematic framework approach. RESULTS: Less than half (47.9%) of adolescents in the survey reported ever discussing sex-related matters with anyone. Three-quarters of those who had this discussion did so with a friend/peer and this had significant correlation with sex/gender (p = 0.04). Out of 1057 adolescents who participated in the survey only 4.5% had ever discussed sex-related matters with a parent and this correlated significantly with wealth index (p = 0.003). Findings from qualitative interviews show that sex-related discussions between parents and adolescents are sporadic, mostly triggered by unpleasant occurrences, and consist of, i) information on pubertal changes, ii) warnings against intersex relationships and premarital sex, iii) promotion of abstinence, and iv) warnings against teenage pregnancy and unsafe abortion. Some parents were of the opinion that sex-related matters should not be discussed with adolescents because it could be interpreted as tolerance for sexual promiscuity. Overall, parents expressed that their capacity to discuss sex-related matters with adolescents is limited by lack of knowledge, and restrictive religious and cultural norms about adolescent sexuality. CONCLUSION: Communication between parents and adolescents on sexual health and reproductive-related matters rarely occurs. However, when it does, it mostly consists of strict warnings that may not protect adolescents from making unhealthy sexual and reproductive health choices. Interventions to improve parent-adolescent communication of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) should aim at improving parents' capacity to communicate sexual and reproductive health matters, and deconstructing sociocultural norms around adolescent sexuality.

Characteristics and Effects of Multiple and Mixed Funding Flows to Public Healthcare Facilities on Financing Outcomes: A Case Study From Nigeria.

Introduction: Most public hospitals in Nigeria are usually financed by funding flows from different health financing mechanisms, which could potentially trigger different provider behaviors that can affect the health system goals of efficiency, equity, and quality of care. The study examined how healthcare providers respond to multiple funding flows and the implications of such flows for achieving equity, efficiency, and quality. Methods: A cross-sectional qualitative study of selected healthcare providers and purchasers in Enugu state was used. Four public hospitals were selected-two tertiary and two secondary; because they received funding from more than one healthcare financing mechanism. Key informants were individual healthcare providers and decision-makers in the hospitals, State Ministry of Health, National Health Insurance Scheme and Health Maintenance Organizations. Service users from each hospital were purposively selected for focus group discussions (FGDs). A total of 66 key informant interviews and 8 FGDs were conducted. Findings: The multiple flows that were received by public hospitals varied by type of health facility (Secondary vs. Tertiary), ownership of health facility (Federal government vs. State government) and population served. Out-of-pocket payment (OOP) and government budget were the only recurring forms of funding to all the public hospitals. It was found that multiple funding flows, generate different signals to service providers, resulting in positive and negative consequences. The results also showed that multiple flows lead to predictability and stability of funding to public hospitals. Hospital Managers and administrators reported that multiple flows increased their financial pool and capacity to undertake capital projects and enabled the provision of a wider range of services to clients. Multiple sources of funding also give a sense of security to health facilities, because there would always be a back-up source of funding if one flow delays or defaults in payment. Nevertheless, health providers were seen to shift resources from less attractive to more attractive flows in response to the relative size perceived adequacy, predictability, and flexibility of funding flow. Patients were also shifted from less predictable to more predictable funding flows and providers charged different rates to different funding flows to make up for the inadequacies in some sources of funding. The negative consequences of multiple funding flows on provider behavior that was reported in the study were wastage/under-utilization of resources, differential quality of care provided to clients, and inequities in resource distribution and access to health services. In some instances, providers' responses resulted in better quality of care for clients and improved access to services that were not ordinarily available or clients could not have been afforded. Conclusion: Multiple funding flows to public hospitals are beneficial as well as constraining to health providers. They can be beneficial in ensuring that hospitals have a ready and predictable pool of funds to render services with. However, they could be detrimental to some patients that could be charged more for some services that other patients pay less and may also lead of provision of differential quality of services to different payments depending on the funding flows that are used to purchase services for them. Ultimately, some of the consequences of multiple funding flows if not properly managed, will affect health systems goals of equity, efficiency and quality of care, either positively or negatively.