How is equity approached in universal health coverage? An analysis of global and country policy documents in Benin and Senegal.

BACKGROUND: Equity seems inherent to the pursuance of universal health coverage (UHC), but it is not a natural consequence of it. We explore how the multidimensional concept of equity has been approached in key global UHC policy documents, as well as in country-level UHC policies. METHODS: We analysed a purposeful sample of UHC reports and policy documents both at global level and in two Western African countries (Benin and Senegal). We manually searched each document for its use and discussion of equity and related terms. The content was summarised and thematically analysed, in order to comprehend how these concepts were understood in the documents. We distinguished between the level at which inequity takes place and the origin or types of inequities. RESULTS: Most of the documents analysed do not define equity in the first place, and speak about "health inequities" in the broad sense, without mentioning the dimension or type of inequity considered. Some dimensions of equity are ambiguous - especially coverage and financing. Many documents assimilate equity to an overall objective or guiding principle closely associated to UHC. The concept of equity is also often linked to other concepts and values (social justice, inclusion, solidarity, human rights - but also to efficiency and sustainability). Regarding the levels of equity most often considered, access (availability, coverage, provision) is the most often quoted dimension, followed by financial protection. Regarding the types of equity considered, those most referred to are socio-economic, geographic, and gender-based disparities. In Benin and Senegal, geographic inequities are mostly pinpointed by UHC policy documents, but concrete interventions mostly target the poor. Overall, the UHC policy of both countries are quite similar in terms of their approach to equity. CONCLUSIONS: While equity is widely referred to in global and country-specific UHC policy documents, its multiple dimensions results in a rather rhetorical utilisation of the concept. Whereas equity covers various levels and types, many global UHC documents fail to define it properly and to comprehend the breadth of the concept. Consequently, perhaps, country-specific policy documents also use equity as a rhetoric principle, without sufficient consideration for concrete ways for implementation.

Country learning on maintaining quality essential health services during COVID-19 in Timor-Leste: a qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This case study examines the enabling factors, strengths, challenges and lessons learnt from Timor-Leste (TLS) as it sought to maintain quality essential health services (EHS) during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A qualitative case study triangulated information from 22 documents, 44 key informant interviews and 6 focus group discussions. The framework method was used to thematically examine the factors impacting quality EHS in TLS. SETTING: National, municipal, facility levels in Baucau, Dili and Ermera municipalities in TLS. RESULTS: Based on the TLS National Health Statistics Reports, a reduction in outpatient, emergency department and primary care service delivery visits was observed in 2020 when compared with 2019. However, in contrast, maternal child health services simultaneously improved in the areas of skilled birth attendants, prenatal coverage and vitamin A distribution, for example. From the thematic analysis, five themes emerged as contributing to or impeding the maintenance of quality EHS including (1) high-level strategy for maintaining quality EHS, (2) measurement for quality and factors affecting service utilisation, (3) challenges in implementation of quality activities across the three levels of the health system, (4) the impact of quality improvement leadership in health facilities during COVID-19 and (5) learning systems for maintaining quality EHS now and for the future. CONCLUSION: The maintenance of quality EHS is critical to mitigate adverse health effects from the COVID-19 pandemic. When quality health services are delivered prior to and maintained during public health emergencies, they build trust within the health system and promote healthcare-seeking behaviour. Planning for quality as part of emergency preparedness can facilitate a high standard of care by ensuring health services continue to provide a safe environment, reduce harm, improve clinical care and engage patients, facilities and communities.

What theories underpin performance-based financing? A scoping review.

PURPOSE: The study aims to explore the theoretical bases justifying the use of performance-based financing (PBF) in the health sector in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors conducted a scoping review of the literature on PBF so as to identify the theories utilized to underpin it and analyzed its theoretical justifications. FINDINGS: Sixty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Economic theories were predominant, with the principal-agent theory being the most commonly-used theory, explicitly referred to by two-thirds of included studies. Psychological theories were also common, with a wide array of motivation theories. Other disciplines in the form of management or organizational science, political and social science and systems approaches also contributed. However, some of the theories referred to contradicted each other. Many of the studies included only casually alluded to one or more theories, and very few used these theories to justify or support PBF. No theory emerged as a dominant, consistent and credible justification of PBF, perhaps except for the principal-agent theory, which was often inappropriately applied in the included studies, and when it included additional assumptions reflecting the contexts of the health sector in LMICs, might actually warn against adopting PBF. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Overall, this review has not been able to identify a comprehensive, credible, consistent, theoretical justification for using PBF rather than alternative approaches to health system reforms and healthcare providers' motivation in LMICs. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The theoretical justifications of PBF in the health sector in LMICs are under-documented. This review is the first of this kind and should encourage further debate and theoretical exploration of the justifications of PBF.

A study on the implementation fidelity of the performance-based financing policy in Burkina Faso after 12 months.

BACKGROUND: Performance-based financing (PBF) in the health sector has recently gained momentum in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as one of the ways forward for achieving Universal Health Coverage. The major principle underlying PBF is that health centers are remunerated based on the quantity and quality of services they provide. PBF has been operating in Burkina Faso since 2011, and as a pilot project since 2014 in 15 health districts randomly assigned into four different models, before an eventual scale-up. Despite the need for expeditious documentation of the impact of PBF, caution is advised to avoid adopting hasty conclusions. Above all, it is crucial to understand why and how an impact is produced or not. Our implementation fidelity study approached this inquiry by comparing, after 12 months of operation, the activities implemented against what was planned initially and will make it possible later to establish links with the policy's impacts. METHODS: Our study compared, in 21 health centers from three health districts, the implementation of activities that were core to the process in terms of content, coverage, and temporality. Data were collected through document analysis, as well as from individual interviews and focus groups with key informants. RESULTS: In the first year of implementation, solid foundations were put in place for the intervention. Even so, implementation deficiencies and delays were observed with respect to certain performance auditing procedures, as well as in payments of PBF subsidies, which compromised the incentive-based rationale to some extent. CONCLUSION: Over next months, efforts should be made to adjust the intervention more closely to context and to the original planning.

Performance-based financing in low-income and middle-income countries: isn't it time for a rethink?

This paper questions the view that performance-based financing (PBF) in the health sector is an effective, efficient and equitable approach to improving the performance of health systems in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). PBF was conceived as an open approach adapted to specific country needs, having the potential to foster system-wide reforms. However, as with many strategies and tools, there is a gap between what was planned and what is actually implemented. This paper argues that PBF as it is currently implemented in many contexts does not satisfy the promises. First, since the start of PBF implementation in LMICs, concerns have been raised on the basis of empirical evidence from different settings and disciplines that indicated the risks, cost and perverse effects. However, PBF implementation was rushed despite insufficient evidence of its effectiveness. Second, there is a lack of domestic ownership of PBF. Considering the amounts of time and money it now absorbs, and the lack of evidence of effectiveness and efficiency, PBF can be characterised as a donor fad. Third, by presenting itself as a comprehensive approach that makes it possible to address all aspects of the health system in any context, PBF monopolises attention and focuses policy dialogue on the short-term results of PBF programmes while diverting attention and resources from broader processes of change and necessary reforms. Too little care is given to system-wide and long-term effects, so that PBF can actually damage health services and systems. This paper ends by proposing entry points for alternative approaches.