Did the poor gain from India's health policy interventions? Evidence from benefit-incidence analysis, 2004-2018.

BACKGROUND: Health policy interventions were expected to improve access to health care delivery, provide financial risk protection, besides reducing inequities that underlie geographic and socio-economic variation in population access to health care. This article examines whether health policy interventions and accelerated health investments in India during 2004-2018 could close the gap in inequity in health care utilization and access to public subsidy by different population groups. Did the poor and socio-economically vulnerable population gain from such government initiatives, compared to the rich and affluent sections of society? And whether the intended objective of improving equity between different regions of the country been achieved during the policy initiatives? This article attempts to assess and provide robust evidence in the Indian context. METHODS: Employing Benefit-Incidence Analysis (BIA) framework, this paper advances earlier evidence by highlighting estimates of health care utilization, concentration and government subsidy by broader provider categories (public versus private) and across service levels (outpatient, inpatient, maternal, pre-and post-natal services). We used 2 waves of household surveys conducted by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) on health and morbidity. The period of analysis was chosen to represent policy interventions spanning 2004 (pre-policy) and 2018 (post-policy era). We present this evidence across three categories of Indian states, namely, high-focus states, high-focus north eastern states and non-focus states. Such categorization facilitates quantification of reform impact of policy level interventions across the three groups. RESULTS: Utilisation of healthcare services, except outpatient care visits, accelerated significantly in 2018 from 2004. The difference in utilisation rates between poor and rich (between poorest 20% and richest 20%) had significantly declined during the same period. As far as concentration of healthcare is concerned, the Concentrate Index (CI) underlying inpatient care in public sector fell from 0.07 in 2004 to 0.05 in 2018, implying less pro-rich distribution. The CI in relation to pre-natal, institutional delivery and postnatal services in government facilities were pro-poor both in 2004 and 2018 in all 3 groups of states. The distribution of public subsidy underscoring curative services (inpatient and outpatient) remained pro-rich in 2004 but turned less pro-rich in 2018, measured by CIs which declined sharply across all groups of states for both outpatient (from 0.21 in 2004 to 0.16 in 2018) and inpatient (from 0.24 in 2004 to 0.14 in 2018) respectively. The CI for subsidy on prenatal services declined from approximately 0.01 in 2004 to 0.12 in 2018. In respect to post-natal care, similar results were observed, implying the subsidy on prenatal and post-natal services was overwhelmingly received by poor. The CI underscoring subsidy for institutional delivery although remained positive both in 2018 and 2004, but slightly increased from 0.17 in 2004 to 0.28 in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in infrastructure and service provisioning through NHM route in the public facilities appears to have relatively benefited the poor. Yet they received a relatively smaller health subsidy than the rich when utilising inpatient and outpatient health services. Inequality continues to persist across all healthcare services in private health sector. Although the NHM remained committed to broader expansion of health care services, a singular focus on maternal and child health conditions especially in backward regions of the country has yielded desired results.

Adequacy of dietary intakes and poverty in India: trends in the 1990s.

Linear programming methods, indicators of nutritional adequacy from the Indian Council of Medical Research and household expenditure survey data from the National Sample Survey Organization were used to construct poverty lines for India. Poverty ratios were calculated for 1993--1994 and 1999--2000 on the basis of nutritional adequacy poverty lines and compared to official estimates of poverty based on energy requirements. Nutritional adequacy poverty lines are higher than official poverty lines, particularly in rural areas. The application of nutritional adequacy poverty lines points to greater rural-urban poverty differences than in official estimates. Declines in rural poverty during the 1990s were also slower under the nutritional adequacy definition, especially in south India. There is a greater degree of rural-urban and regional bias in nutritional adequacy poverty reduction than suggested by official data. Inter-state variations in changes in nutritional poverty and official poverty in the 1990s are largely explained by differences in assumptions on overall price movements. However, relative price movements in food items also played a role, particularly the slow increase in prices of cereals and edible oils in comparison to the prices of pulses, and in some southern states, compared to milk and vegetable prices as well.

Reducing out-of-pocket expenditures to reduce poverty: a disaggregated analysis at rural-urban and state level in India.

Out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure on health care has significant implications for poverty in many developing countries. This paper aims to assess the differential impact of OOP expenditure and its components, such as expenditure on inpatient care, outpatient care and on drugs, across different income quintiles, between developed and less developed regions in India. It also attempts to measure poverty at disaggregated rural-urban and state levels. Based on Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES) data from the National Sample Survey (NSS), conducted in 1999-2000, the share of households' expenditure on health services and drugs was calculated. The number of individuals below the state-specific rural and urban poverty line in 17 major states, with and without netting out OOP expenditure, was determined. This also enabled the calculation of the poverty gap or poverty deepening in each region. Estimates show that OOP expenditure is about 5% of total household expenditure (ranging from about 2% in Assam to almost 7% in Kerala) with a higher proportion being recorded in rural areas and affluent states. Purchase of drugs constitutes 70% of the total OOP expenditure. Approximately 32.5 million persons fell below the poverty line in 1999-2000 through OOP payments, implying that the overall poverty increase after accounting for OOP expenditure is 3.2% (as against a rise of 2.2% shown in earlier literature). Also, the poverty headcount increase and poverty deepening is much higher in poorer states and rural areas compared with affluent states and urban areas, except in the case of Maharashtra. High OOP payment share in total health expenditures did not always imply a high poverty headcount; state-specific economic and social factors played a role. The paper argues for better methods of capturing drugs expenditure in household surveys and recommends that special attention be paid to expenditures on drugs, in particular for the poor. Targeted policies in just five poor states to reduce OOP expenditure could help to prevent almost 60% of the poverty headcount increase through OOP payments.

Diffusion of medical technology: medical devices in India.

This review examines the diffusion of modern medical devices in India by analyzing trends in India's cross-border trade in medical devices, its domestic medical device production and utilization by households. We explore the implications of this process of diffusion for the efficacy, cost-effectiveness and equitable use of new medical devices in India, and review recent efforts to regulate the Indian medical device sector.