Health expenditures by services and providers for 195 countries, 2000-2017.

INTRODUCTION: National Health Accounts are a significant source of health expenditure data, designed to be comprehensive and comparable across countries. However, there is currently no single repository of this data and even when compiled major gaps persist. This research aims to provide policymakers and researchers with a single repository of available national health expenditures by healthcare functions (ie, services) and providers of such services. Leveraging these data within statistical methods, a complete set of detailed health expenditures is estimated. METHODS: A methodical compilation and synthesis of all available national health expenditure reports including disaggregation by healthcare functions and providers was conducted. Using these data, a Bayesian multivariate regression analysis was implemented to estimate national-level health expenditures by the cross-classification of functions and providers for 195 countries, from 2000 to 2017. RESULTS: This research used 1662 country-years and 110 070 data points of health expenditures from existing National Health Accounts. The most detailed country-year had 52% of the categories of interest reported. Of all health functions, curative care and medical goods were estimated to make up 51.4% (uncertainty interval (UI) 33.2% to 59.4%) and 17.5% (UI 13.0% to 26.9%) of total global health expenditures in 2017, respectively. Three-quarters of the global health expenditures are allocated to three categories of providers: hospital providers (35.4%, UI 30.3% to 38.9%), providers of ambulatory care (25.5%, UI 21.1% to 28.8%) and retailers of medical goods (14.4%, UI 12.4% to 16.3%). As gross domestic product increases, countries spend more on long-term care and less on preventive care. CONCLUSION: Disaggregated estimates of health expenditures are often unavailable and unable to provide policymakers and researchers a holistic understanding of how expenditures are used. This research aggregates reported data and provides a complete time-series of estimates, with uncertainty, of health expenditures by health functions and providers between 2000 and 2017 for 195 countries.

Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding potential patterns in future population levels is crucial for anticipating and planning for changing age structures, resource and health-care needs, and environmental and economic landscapes. Future fertility patterns are a key input to estimation of future population size, but they are surrounded by substantial uncertainty and diverging methodologies of estimation and forecasting, leading to important differences in global population projections. Changing population size and age structure might have profound economic, social, and geopolitical impacts in many countries. In this study, we developed novel methods for forecasting mortality, fertility, migration, and population. We also assessed potential economic and geopolitical effects of future demographic shifts. METHODS: We modelled future population in reference and alternative scenarios as a function of fertility, migration, and mortality rates. We developed statistical models for completed cohort fertility at age 50 years (CCF50). Completed cohort fertility is much more stable over time than the period measure of the total fertility rate (TFR). We modelled CCF50 as a time-series random walk function of educational attainment and contraceptive met need. Age-specific fertility rates were modelled as a function of CCF50 and covariates. We modelled age-specific mortality to 2100 using underlying mortality, a risk factor scalar, and an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model. Net migration was modelled as a function of the Socio-demographic Index, crude population growth rate, and deaths from war and natural disasters; and use of an ARIMA model. The model framework was used to develop a reference scenario and alternative scenarios based on the pace of change in educational attainment and contraceptive met need. We estimated the size of gross domestic product for each country and territory in the reference scenario. Forecast uncertainty intervals (UIs) incorporated uncertainty propagated from past data inputs, model estimation, and forecast data distributions. FINDINGS: The global TFR in the reference scenario was forecasted to be 1·66 (95% UI 1·33-2·08) in 2100. In the reference scenario, the global population was projected to peak in 2064 at 9·73 billion (8·84-10·9) people and decline to 8·79 billion (6·83-11·8) in 2100. The reference projections for the five largest countries in 2100 were India (1·09 billion [0·72-1·71], Nigeria (791 million [594-1056]), China (732 million [456-1499]), the USA (336 million [248-456]), and Pakistan (248 million [151-427]). Findings also suggest a shifting age structure in many parts of the world, with 2·37 billion (1·91-2·87) individuals older than 65 years and 1·70 billion (1·11-2·81) individuals younger than 20 years, forecasted globally in 2100. By 2050, 151 countries were forecasted to have a TFR lower than the replacement level (TFR <2·1), and 183 were forecasted to have a TFR lower than replacement by 2100. 23 countries in the reference scenario, including Japan, Thailand, and Spain, were forecasted to have population declines greater than 50% from 2017 to 2100; China's population was forecasted to decline by 48·0% (-6·1 to 68·4). China was forecasted to become the largest economy by 2035 but in the reference scenario, the USA was forecasted to once again become the largest economy in 2098. Our alternative scenarios suggest that meeting the Sustainable Development Goals targets for education and contraceptive met need would result in a global population of 6·29 billion (4·82-8·73) in 2100 and a population of 6·88 billion (5·27-9·51) when assuming 99th percentile rates of change in these drivers. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that continued trends in female educational attainment and access to contraception will hasten declines in fertility and slow population growth. A sustained TFR lower than the replacement level in many countries, including China and India, would have economic, social, environmental, and geopolitical consequences. Policy options to adapt to continued low fertility, while sustaining and enhancing female reproductive health, will be crucial in the years to come. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Tracking development assistance for health from China, 2007-2017.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, China has increased its international engagement in health. Nonetheless, the lack of data on contributions has limited efforts to examine contributions from China. Existing estimates that track development assistance for health (DAH) from China have relied primarily on one dataset. Furthermore, little is known about the disbursing agencies especially the multilaterals through which contributions are disbursed and how these are changing across time. In this study, we generated estimates of DAH from China from 2007 through 2017 and disaggregated those estimates by disbursing agency and health focus area. METHODS: We identified the major government agencies providing DAH. To estimate DAH provided by each agency, we leveraged publicly available development assistance data in government agencies' budgets and financial accounts, as well as revenue statements from key international development agencies such as the WHO. We reported trends in DAH from China, disaggregated contributions by disbursing bilateral and multilateral agencies, and compared DAH from China with other traditional donors. We also compared these estimates with existing estimates. RESULTS: DAH provided by China grew dramatically, from US$323.1 million in 2007 to $652.3 million in 2017. During this period, 91.8% of DAH from China was disbursed through its bilateral agencies, including the Ministry of Commerce ($3.7 billion, 64.1%) and the National Health Commission ($917.1 million, 16.1%); the other 8.2% was disbursed through multilateral agencies including the WHO ($236.5 million, 4.1%) and the World Bank ($123.1 million, 2.2%). Relative to its level of economic development, China provided substantially more DAH than would be expected. However, relative to population size and government spending, China's contributions are modest. CONCLUSION: In the current context of plateauing in the growth rate of DAH contributions, China has the potential to contribute to future global health financing, especially financing for health system strengthening.

The G20 and development assistance for health: historical trends and crucial questions to inform a new era.

One of the most important gatherings of the world's economic leaders, the G20 Summit and ministerial meetings, takes place in June, 2019. The Summit presents a valuable opportunity to reflect on the provision and receipt of development assistance for health (DAH) and the role the G20 can have in shaping the future of health financing. The participants at the G20 Summit (ie, the world's largest providers of DAH, emerging donors, and DAH recipients) and this Summit's particular focus on global health and the Sustainable Development Goals offers a unique forum to consider the changing DAH context and its pressing questions. In this Health Policy perspective, we examined trends in DAH and its evolution over time, with a particular focus on G20 countries; pointed to persistent and emerging challenges for discussion at the G20 Summit; and highlighted key questions for G20 leaders to address to put the future of DAH on course to meet the expansive Sustainable Development Goals. Key questions include how to best focus DAH for equitable health gains, how to deliver DAH to strengthen health systems, and how to support domestic resource mobilisation and transformative partnerships for sustainable impact. These issues are discussed in the context of the growing effects of climate change, demographic and epidemiological transitions, and a global political shift towards increasing prioritisation of national interests. Although not all these questions are new, novel approaches to allocating DAH that prioritise equity, efficiency, and sustainability, particularly through domestic resource use and mobilisation are needed. Wrestling with difficult questions in a changing landscape is essential to develop a DAH financing system capable of supporting and sustaining crucial global health goals.

Potential for additional government spending on HIV/AIDS in 137 low-income and middle-income countries: an economic modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Between 2012 and 2016, development assistance for HIV/AIDS decreased by 20·0%; domestic financing is therefore critical to sustaining the response to HIV/AIDS. To understand whether domestic resources could fill the financing gaps created by declines in development assistance, we aimed to track spending on HIV/AIDS and estimated the potential for governments to devote additional domestic funds to HIV/AIDS. METHODS: We extracted 8589 datapoints reporting spending on HIV/AIDS. We used spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression to estimate a complete time series of spending by domestic sources (government, prepaid private, and out-of-pocket) and spending category (prevention, and care and treatment) from 2000 to 2016 for 137 low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Development assistance data for HIV/AIDS were from Financing Global Health 2018, and HIV/AIDS prevalence, incidence, and mortality were from the Global Burden of Disease study 2017. We used stochastic frontier analysis to estimate potential additional government spending on HIV/AIDS, which was conditional on the current government health budget and other finance, economic, and contextual factors associated with HIV/AIDS spending. All spending estimates were reported in 2018 US$. FINDINGS: Between 2000 and 2016, total spending on HIV/AIDS in LMICs increased from $4·0 billion (95% uncertainty interval 2·9-6·0) to $19·9 billion (15·8-26·3), spending on HIV/AIDS prevention increased from $596 million (258 million to 1·3 billion) to $3·0 billion (1·5-5·8), and spending on HIV/AIDS care and treatment increased from $1·1 billion (458·1 million to 2·2 billion) to $7·2 billion (4·3-11·8). Over this time period, the share of resources sourced from development assistance increased from 33·2% (21·3-45·0) to 46·0% (34·2-57·0). Care and treatment spending per year on antiretroviral therapy varied across countries, with an IQR of $284-2915. An additional $12·1 billion (8·4-17·5) globally could be mobilised by governments of LMICs to finance the response to HIV/AIDS. Most of these potential resources are concentrated in ten middle-income countries (Argentina, China, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Russia, South Africa, and Vietnam). INTERPRETATION: Some governments could mobilise more domestic resources to fight HIV/AIDS, which could free up additional development assistance for many countries without this ability, including many low-income, high-prevalence countries. However, a large gap exists between available financing and the funding needed to achieve global HIV/AIDS goals, and sustained and coordinated effort across international and domestic development partners is required to end AIDS by 2030. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Trends and drivers of government health spending in sub-Saharan Africa, 1995-2015.

INTRODUCTION: Government health spending is a primary source of funding in the health sector across the world. However, in sub-Saharan Africa, only about a third of all health spending is sourced from the government. The objectives of this study are to describe the growth in government health spending, examine its determinants and explain the variation in government health spending across sub-Saharan African countries. METHODS: We used panel data on domestic government health spending in 46 countries in sub-Saharan Africa from 1995 to 2015 from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. A regression model was used to examine the factors associated with government health spending, and Shapley decomposition was used to attribute the contributions of factors to the explained variance in government health spending. RESULTS: While the growth rate in government health spending in sub-Saharan Africa has been positive overall, there are variations across subgroups. Between 1995 and 2015, government health spending in West Africa grew by 6.7% (95% uncertainty intervals [UI]: 6.2% to 7.0%) each year, whereas in Southern Africa it grew by only 4.5% (UI: 4.5% to 4.5%) each year. Furthermore, per-person government health spending ranged from $651 (Namibia) in 2017 purchasing power parity dollars to $4 (Central African Republic) in 2015. Good governance, national income and the share of it that is government spending were positively associated with government health spending. The results from the decomposition, however, showed that individual country characteristics made up the highest percentage of the explained variation in government health spending across sub-Saharan African countries. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight that a country's policy choices are important for how much the health sector receives. As the attention of the global health community focuses on ways to stimulate domestic government health spending, an understanding that individual country sociopolitical context is an important driver for success will be key.

Tracking donor funding towards achieving the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) goals: A landscape analysis (1990-2016).

Efforts driving universal coverage have recently been strengthened through implementation of the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) where cost estimates for immunization support were developed totaling US$40 billion of donor assistance by 2020. In addition to resource mobilization, there has been an increasing focus on improving both vaccine access and delivery systems. We track donor assistance for immunization by funding objective and channel from 1990 to 2016, and illustrate projections through 2020 to inform progress of the GVAP. Using available data from development agencies supporting immunization, we categorize funding by vaccine and quantify support for systems strengthening. We split time into four periods including the post universal childhood immunization era (1990-1999) and Gavi's three funding phases between 2000 and 2015, during which annualized funding changes are estimated. Lastly, we perform a linear extrapolation through 2020 to predict the success of stipulated resource mobilization targets. Double counting was eliminated and results presented in real 2017 US dollars. Over the last 27 years, funding for immunization increased by 10.5% annually, with non-Gavi funding increasing by 7.1% and Gavi funding by 23.6% in the last 17 years. Gavi disbursements targeting vaccines and health system improvements increased uniformly at 15%, compared to 22.5% for vaccines and 11.7% for system strengthening from non-Gavi channels. Funding fluctuated for non-Gavi channels with disbursements declining before 2000 and during Gavi funding phase II, while Gavi disbursements continued to grow relative the previous phase. New and underused vaccines were prioritized by Gavi whereas non-Gavi channels focused on elimination efforts. Projected funding targets were estimated to be on track for Gavi contrary to non-Gavi support which was estimated to remain 40% below the stipulated target. Renewed assessments for funding requirements need to be undertaken, while strengthening existing resource efficiencies in order to achieve current global universal coverage targets.

Donor financing of human resources for health, 1990-2016: an examination of trends, sources of funds, and recipients.

BACKGROUND: Skilled health professionals are a critical component of the effective delivery of lifesaving health interventions. The inadequate number of skilled health professionals in many low- and middle-income countries has been identified as a constraint to the achievement of improvements in health outcomes. In response, more international development agencies have provided funds toward broader health system initiatives and health workforce activities in particular. Nonetheless, estimates of the amount of donor funding targeting investments in human resources for health activities are few. METHODS: We utilize data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's annual database on development assistance for health. The estimates in the database are generated using data from publicly available databases that track development assistance. To estimate development assistance for human resources for health, we use keywords to identify projects targeted toward human resource processes. We track development for human resources for health from 1990 through 2016. We categorize the types of human-resources-related projects funded and examine the availability of human resources, development assistance for human resources for health, and disease burden. RESULTS: We find that the amount of donor funding directed toward human resources for health has increased from only $34 million in 1990 to $1.5 billion in 2016 (in 2017 US dollars). Overall, $18.5 billion in 2017 US dollars was targeted toward human resources for health between 1990 and 2016. The primary regions receiving these resources were sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Oceania. The main donor countries were the United States, Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. The main agencies through which these resources were disbursed are non-governmental organizations (NGOs), US bilateral agencies, and UN agencies. CONCLUSION: In 2016, less than 4% of development assistance for health could be tied to funding for human resources. Given the central role skilled health workers play in health systems, in order to make credible progress in reducing disparities in health and attaining the goal of universal health coverage for all by 2030, it may be appropriate for more resources to be mobilized in order to guarantee adequate manpower to deliver key health interventions.

The US Provided $13 Billion In Development Assistance For Health In 2016, Less Per Person Than Many Peer Nations.

Despite dramatic growth between 1990 and 2010, development assistance for health from high-income countries and development agencies to low- and middle-income countries has stagnated, and proposed cuts make future funding uncertain. To further understand international financial flows for health, we examined international contributions from major donor countries. Our findings showed that the United States provided more development assistance for health than any other country, but it provided less than others relative to national population, government spending, and income. Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, and the United Kingdom stand out when the provision of health assistance is considered relative to these other factors. Seventeen of twenty-three countries did not reach a target that corresponds to an international goal. If all twenty-three countries had reached this goal, an additional $13.3 billion would have been available for global health in 2016. Systematic efforts are needed to encourage countries to meet these targets. Sustained health improvement in low- and middle-income countries will benefit greatly from ongoing international support.