Factors influencing institutionalization of health technology assessment in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: There is a global interest in institutionalizing health technology assessment (HTA) as an approach for explicit healthcare priority-setting. Institutionalization of HTA refers to the process of conducting and utilizing HTA as a normative practice for guiding resource allocation decisions within the health system. In this study, we aimed to examine the factors that were influencing institutionalization of HTA in Kenya. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative case study using document reviews and in-depth interviews with 30 participants involved in the HTA institutionalization process in Kenya. We used a thematic approach to analyze the data. RESULTS: We found that institutionalization of HTA in Kenya was being supported by factors such as establishment of organizational structures for HTA; availability of legal frameworks and policies on HTA; increasing availability of awareness creation and capacity-building initiatives for HTA; policymakers' interests in universal health coverage and optimal allocation of resources; technocrats' interests in evidence-based processes; presence of international collaboration for HTA; and lastly, involvement of bilateral agencies. On the other hand, institutionalization of HTA was being undermined by limited availability of skilled human resources, financial resources, and information resources for HTA; lack of HTA guidelines and decision-making frameworks; limited HTA awareness among subnational stakeholders; and industries' interests in safeguarding their revenue. CONCLUSIONS: Kenya's Ministry of Health can facilitate institutionalization of HTA by adopting a systemic approach that involves: - (a) introducing long-term capacity-building initiatives to strengthen human and technical capacity for HTA; (b) earmarking national health budgets to ensure adequate financial resources for HTA; (c) introducing a cost database and promoting timely data collection to ensure availability of data for HTA; (d) developing context specific HTA guidelines and decision-making frameworks to facilitate HTA processes; (e) conducting deeper advocacy to strengthen HTA awareness among subnational stakeholders; and (f) managing stakeholders' interests to minimize opposition to institutionalization of HTA.

Examining purchasing reforms towards universal health coverage by the National Hospital Insurance Fund in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Kenya has prioritized the attainment of universal health coverage (UHC) through the expansion of health insurance coverage by the National Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF). In 2015, the NHIF introduced reforms in premium contribution rates, benefit packages, and provider payment methods. We examined the influence of these reforms on NHIF's purchasing practices and their implications for strategic purchasing and health system goals of equity, efficiency and quality. METHODS: We conducted an embedded case study with the NHIF as the case and the reforms as embedded units of analysis. We collected data at the national level and in two purposively selected counties through 41 in-depth interviews with health financing stakeholders, facility managers and frontline providers; 4 focus group discussions with 51 NHIF members; and, document reviews. We analysed the data using a Framework approach. RESULTS: The new NHIF reforms were characterized by weak purchasing actions. Firstly, the new premium contribution rates were inadequately communicated and unaffordable for certain citizen groups. Secondly, while the new benefit packages were reported to be based on service needs, preferences and values of the population, they were inadequately communicated and unequally distributed across different citizen groups. In addition, the presence of service delivery infrastructure gaps in public healthcare facilities and the pro-urban and pro-private distribution of contracted health facilities compromised delivery of, and access to, these new services. Lastly, the new provider payment methods and rates were considered inadequate, with delayed payments and weak links to financial accountability mechanisms which compromised their ability to incentivize equity, efficiency and quality of healthcare delivery. CONCLUSION: While NHIF sought to expand population and service coverage and reduce out-of-pocket payments with the new reforms, weaknesses in the reforms' design and implementation limited NHIF's purchasing actions with negative implications for the health system goals of equity, efficiency and quality. For the reforms to accelerate the country's progress towards UHC, policy makers at the NHIF and, national and county government should make deliberate efforts to align the design and implementation of such reforms with strategic purchasing actions that are aimed at improving health system goals.

"We are called the et cetera": experiences of the poor with health financing reforms that target them in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Through a number of healthcare reforms, Kenya has demonstrated its intention to extend financial risk protection and service coverage for poor and vulnerable groups. These reforms include the provision of free maternity services, user-fee removal in public primary health facilities and a health insurance subsidy programme (HISP) for the poor. However, the available evidence points to inequity and the likelihood that the poor will still be left behind with regards to financial risk protection and service coverage. This study examined the experiences of the poor with health financing reforms that target them. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative cross-sectional study in two purposively selected counties in Kenya. We collected data through focus group discussions (n = 8) and in-depth interviews (n = 30) with people in the lowest wealth quintile residing in the health and demographic surveillance systems, and HISP beneficiaries. We analyzed the data using a framework approach focusing on four healthcare access dimensions; geographical accessibility, affordability, availability, and acceptability. RESULTS: Health financing reforms reduced financial barriers and improved access to health services for the poor in the study counties. However, various access barriers limited the extent to which they benefited from these reforms. Long distances, lack of public transport, poor condition of the roads and high transport costs especially in rural areas limited access to health facilities. Continued charging of user fees despite their abolition, delayed insurance reimbursements to health facilities that HISP beneficiaries were seeking care from, and informal fees exposed the poor to out of pocket payments. Stock-outs of medicine and other medical supplies, dysfunctional medical equipment, shortage of healthcare workers, and frequent strikes adversely affected the availability of health services. Acceptability of care was further limited by discrimination by healthcare workers and ineffective grievance redress mechanisms which led to a feeling of disempowerment among the poor. CONCLUSIONS: Pro-poor health financing reforms improved access to care for the poor to some extent. However, to enhance the effectiveness of pro-poor reforms and to ensure that the poor in Kenya benefit fully from them, there is a need to address barriers to healthcare seeking across all access dimensions.

How do gender and disability influence the ability of the poor to benefit from pro-poor health financing policies in Kenya? An intersectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Health inequity has mainly been linked to differences in economic status, with the poor facing greater challenges accessing healthcare than the less poor. To extend financial coverage to the poor and vulnerable, Kenya has therefore implemented several pro-poor health policy reforms. However, other social determinants of health such as gender and disability also influence health status and access to care. This study employed an intersectional approach to explore how gender disability and poverty interact to influence how poor women in Kenya benefit from pro-poor financing policies that target them. METHODS: We applied a qualitative cross-sectional study approach in two purposively selected counties in Kenya. We collected data using in-depth interviews with women with disabilities living in poverty who were beneficiaries of the health insurance subsidy programme and those in the lowest wealth quintiles residing in the health and demographic surveillance system. We analyzed data using a thematic approach drawing from the study's conceptual framework. RESULTS: Women with disabilities living in poverty often opted to forgo seeking free healthcare services because of their roles as the primary household providers and caregivers. Due to limited mobility, they needed someone to accompany them to health facilities, leading to greater transport costs. The absence of someone to accompany them and unaffordability of the high transport costs, for example, made some women forgo seeking antenatal and skilled delivery services despite the existence of a free maternity programme. The layout and equipment at health facilities offering care under pro-poor health financing policies were disability-unfriendly. The latter in addition to negative healthcare worker attitudes towards women with disabilities discouraged them from seeking care. Negative stereotypes against women with disabilities in the society led to their exclusion from public participation forums thereby limiting their awareness about health services. CONCLUSIONS: Intersections of gender, poverty, and disability influenced the experiences of women with disabilities living in poverty with pro-poor health financing policies in Kenya. Addressing the healthcare access barriers they face could entail ensuring availability of disability-friendly health facilities and public transport systems, building cultural competence in health service delivery, and empowering them to engage in public participation.

A critical analysis of health care purchasing arrangements in Kenya: A case study of the county departments of health.

BACKGROUND: Purchasing in health care financing refers to the transfer of pooled funds to health care providers for the provision of health care services. There is limited empirical work on purchasing arrangements and what is required for strategic purchasing in low- and middle-income countries. We conducted this study to critically assess the purchasing arrangements of the county departments of health (CDOH) who are the largest purchasers of health care in Kenya. METHODS: We used a qualitative case study approach to assess the extent to which the purchasing actions of the CDOH in Kenya were strategic. We purposively sampled 10 counties and collected data using in-depth interviews (n = 81), focus group discussions (n = 4), and documents review. We analyzed data using a framework approach. RESULTS: County departments of health did not practice strategic purchasing. The government's (national and county) role as a steward for the purchasing function was characterized by poor accountability and inadequate budgetary allocations for service delivery. The absence of a purchaser-provider split between the CDOH and public health care providers undermined provider selection based on performance and quality. Poor public participation and ineffective complaints and feedback mechanisms limited public accountability and responsiveness to the needs of the people. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that while there are frameworks that could promote strategic purchasing of the CDOH, strategic purchasing is impaired by poor implementation of these frameworks and the inherent weaknesses of a public integrated purchasing system that lacks purchaser-provider split.

A qualitative evaluation of priority-setting by the Health Benefits Package Advisory Panel in Kenya.

Kenya's Ministry of Health established the Health Benefits Package Advisory Panel (HBPAP) in 2018 to develop a benefits package for universal health coverage. This study evaluated HBPAP's process for developing the benefits package against the normative procedural (acceptable way of doing things) and outcome (acceptable consequences) conditions of an ideal healthcare priority-setting process as outlined in the study's conceptual framework. We conducted a qualitative case study using in-depth interviews with national-level respondents (n = 20) and document reviews. Data were analysed using a thematic approach. HBPAP's process partially fulfilled the procedural and outcome conditions of the study's evaluative framework. Concerning the procedural conditions, transparency and publicity were partially met and were limited by the lack of publication of HBPAP's report. While HBPAP used explicit and evidence-based priority-setting criteria, challenges included lack of primary data and local cost-effectiveness threshold, weak health information systems, short timelines and political interference. While a wide range of stakeholders were engaged, this was limited by short timelines and inadequate financial resources. Empowerment of non-HBPAP members was limited by their inadequate technical knowledge and experience in priority-setting. Finally, appeals and revisions were limited by short timelines and lack of implementation of the proposed benefits package. Concerning the outcome conditions, stakeholder understanding was limited by the technical nature of the process and short timelines, while stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction were limited by lack of transparency. HBPAP's benefits package was not implemented due to stakeholder interests and opposition. Priority-setting processes for benefits package development in Kenya could be improved by publicizing the outcome of the process, allocating adequate time and financial resources, strengthening health information systems, generating local evidence and enhancing stakeholder awareness and engagement to increase their empowerment, understanding and acceptance of the process. Managing politics and stakeholder interests is key in enhancing the success of priority-setting processes.

Analysing the Efficiency of Health Systems: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Efficiency refers the use of resources in ways that optimise desired outcomes. Health system efficiency is a priority concern for policy makers globally as countries aim to achieve universal health coverage, and face the additional challenge of an aging population. Efficiency analysis in the health sector has typically focused on the efficiency of healthcare facilities (hospitals, primary healthcare facilities), with few studies focusing on system level (national or sub-national) efficiency. We carried out a thematic review of literature that assessed the efficiency of health systems at the national and sub-national level. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and Google scholar between 2000 and 2021 and a manual search of relevant papers selected from their reference lists. A total of 131 papers were included. We analysed and synthesised evidence from the selected papers using a thematic approach (selecting, sorting, coding and charting collected data according to identified key issues and themes). FINDINGS: There were more publications from high- and upper middle-income countries (53%) than from low-income and lower middle-income countries. There were also more publications focusing on national level (60%) compared to sub-national health systems' efficiency. Only 6% of studies used either qualitative methods or mixed methods while 94% used quantitative approaches. Data envelopment analysis, a non-parametric method, was the most common methodological approach used, followed by stochastic frontier analysis, a parametric method. A range of regression methods were used to identify the determinants of health system efficiency. While studies used a range of inputs, these generally considered the building blocks of health systems, health risk factors, and social determinants of health. Outputs used in efficiency analysis could be classified as either intermediate health service outputs (e.g., number of health facility visits), single health outcomes (e.g., infant mortality rate) or composite indices of either intermediate outputs of health outcomes (e.g., Health Adjusted Life Expectancy). Factors that were found to affect health system efficiency include demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the population, macro-economic characteristics of the national and sub-national regions, population health and wellbeing, the governance and political characteristics of these regions, and health system characteristics. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the limited evidence on health system efficiency, especially in low- and middle-income countries. It also reveals the dearth of efficiency studies that use mixed methods approaches by incorporating qualitative inquiry. The review offers insights on the drivers of the efficiency of national and sub-national health systems, and highlights potential targets for reforms to improve health system efficiency.

Examining multiple funding flows to public healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries - results from case studies in Burkina Faso, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Tunisia and Vietnam.

Provider payment methods are traditionally examined by appraising the incentive signals inherent in individual payment mechanisms. However, mixed payment arrangements, which result in multiple funding flows from purchasers to providers, could be better understood by applying a systems approach that assesses the combined effects of multiple payment streams on healthcare providers. Guided by the framework developed by Barasa et al. (2021) (Barasa E, Mathauer I, Kabia E et al. 2021. How do healthcare providers respond to multiple funding flows? A conceptual framework and options to align them. Health Policy and Planning  36: 861-8.), this paper synthesizes the findings from six country case studies that examined multiple funding flows and describes the potential effect of multiple payment streams on healthcare provider behaviour in low- and middle-income countries. The qualitative findings from this study reveal the extent of undesirable provider behaviour occurring due to the receipt of multiple funding flows and explain how certain characteristics of funding flows can drive the occurrence of undesirable behaviours. Service and resource shifting occurred in most of the study countries; however, the occurrence of cost shifting was less evident. The perceived adequacy of payment rates was found to be the strongest driver of provider behaviour in the countries examined. The study results indicate that undesirable provider behaviours can have negative impacts on efficiency, equity and quality in healthcare service provision. Further empirical studies are required to add to the evidence on this link. In addition, future research could explore how governance arrangements can be used to coordinate multiple funding flows, mitigate unfavourable consequences and identify issues associated with the implementation of relevant governance measures.

International Partnerships to Develop Evidence-informed Priority Setting Institutions: Ten Years of Experience from the International Decision Support Initiative (iDSI).

All health systems must set priorities. Evidence-informed priority-setting (EIPS) is a specific form of systematic priority-setting which involves explicit consideration of evidence to determine the healthcare interventions to be provided. The international Decision Support Initiative (iDSI) was established in 2013 as a collaborative platform to catalyze faster progress on EIPS, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This article summarizes the successes, challenges, and lessons learned from ten years of iDSI partnering with countries to develop EIPS institutions and processes. This is a thematic documentary analysis, structured by iDSI's theory of change, extracting successes, challenges, and lessons from three external evaluations and 19 internal reports to funders. We identified three phases of iDSI's work-inception (2013-15), scale-up (2016-2019), and focus on Africa (2019-2023). iDSI has established a global platform for coordinating EIPS, advanced the field, and supported regional networks in Asia and Africa. It has facilitated progress in securing high-level commitment to EIPS, strengthened EIPS institutions, and developed capacity for health technology assessments. This has resulted in improved decisions on service provision, procurement, and clinical care. Major lessons learned include the importance of sustained political will to develop EIPS; a clear EIPS mandate; inclusive governance structures appropriate to health financing context; politically sensitive and country-led support to EIPS, taking advantage of policy windows for EIPS reforms; regional networks for peer support and long-term sustainability; utilization of context appropriate methods such as adaptive HTA; and crucially, donor-funded global health initiatives supporting and integrating with national EIPS systems, not undermining them.

Examining health sector stakeholder perceptions on the efficiency of county health systems in Kenya.

Efficiency gains is a potential strategy to expand Kenya's fiscal space for health. We explored health sector stakeholders' understanding of efficiency and their perceptions of the factors that influence the efficiency of county health systems in Kenya. We conducted a qualitative cross-sectional study and collected data using three focus group discussions during a stakeholder engagement workshop. Workshop participants included health sector stakeholders from the national ministry of health and 10 (out 47) county health departments, and non-state actors in Kenya. A total of 25 health sector stakeholders participated. We analysed data using a thematic approach. Health sector stakeholders indicated the need for the outputs and outcomes of a health system to be aligned to community health needs. They felt that both hardware aspects of the system (such as the financial resources, infrastructure, human resources for health) and software aspects of the system (such as health sector policies, public finance management systems, actor relationships) should be considered as inputs in the analysis of county health system efficiency. They also felt that while traditional indicators of health system performance such as intervention coverage or outcomes for infectious diseases, and reproductive, maternal, neonatal and child health are still relevant, emerging epidemiological trends such as an increase in the burden of non-communicable diseases should also be considered. The stakeholders identified public finance management, human resources for health, political interests, corruption, management capacity, and poor coordination as factors that influence the efficiency of county health systems. An in-depth examination of the factors that influence the efficiency of county health systems could illuminate potential policy levers for generating efficiency gains. Mixed methods approaches could facilitate the study of both hardware and software factors that are considered inputs, outputs or factors that influence health system efficiency. County health system efficiency in Kenya could be enhanced by improving the timeliness of financial flows to counties and health facilities, giving health facilities financial autonomy, improving the number, skill mix, and motivation of healthcare staff, managing political interests, enhancing anticorruption strategies, strengthening management capacity and coordination in the health sector.

How do healthcare providers respond to multiple funding flows? A conceptual framework and options to align them.

Provider payment methods are a key health policy lever because they influence healthcare provider behaviour and affect health system objectives, such as efficiency, equity, financial protection and quality. Previous research focused on analysing individual provider payment methods in isolation, or on the actions of individual purchasers. However, purchasers typically use a mix of provider payment methods to pay healthcare providers and most health systems are fragmented with multiple purchasers. From a health provider perspective, these different payments are experienced as multiple funding flows which together send a complex set of signals about where they should focus their effort. In this article, we argue that there is a need to expand the analysis of provider payment methods to include an analysis of the interactions of multiple funding flows and the combined effect of their incentives on the provision of healthcare services. The purpose of the article is to highlight the importance of multiple funding flows to health facilities and present a conceptual framework to guide their analysis. The framework hypothesizes that when healthcare providers receive multiple funding flows, they may find certain funding flows more favourable than others based on how these funding flows compare to each other on a range of attributes. This creates a set of incentives, and consequently, healthcare providers may alter their behaviour in three ways: resource shifting, service shifting and cost shifting. We describe these behaviours and how they may affect health system objectives. Our analysis underlines the need to align the incentives generated by multiple funding flows. To achieve this, we propose three policy strategies that relate to the governance of healthcare purchasing: reducing the fragmentation of health financing arrangements to decrease the number of multiple purchaser arrangements and funding flows; harmonizing signals from multiple funding flows; and constraining providers from responding to undesirable incentives.

Influence of organisational culture on the implementation of health sector reforms in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative interpretive review.

BACKGROUND: Health systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, are commonly plagued by poor access, poor performance, inefficient use and inequitable distribution of resources. To improve health system efficiency, equity and effectiveness, the World Development Report of 1993 proposed a first wave of health sector reforms, which has been followed by further waves. Various authors, however, suggest that the early reforms did not lead to the anticipated improvements. They offer, as one plausible explanation for this gap, the limited consideration given to the influence over implementation of the software aspects of the health system, such as organisational culture - which has not previously been fully investigated. OBJECTIVE: To identify, interpret and synthesise existing literature for evidence on organisational culture and how it influences implementation of health sector reforms in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of eight databases: PubMed; Africa-Wide Information, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Econlit, PsycINFO, SocINDEX with full text, Emerald and Scopus. Eight papers were identified. We analysed and synthesised these papers using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: This review indicates the potential influence of dimensions of organisational culture such as power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and in-group and institutional collectivism over the implementation of health sector reforms. This influence is mediated through organisational practices such as communication and feedback, management styles, commitment and participation in decision-making. CONCLUSION: This interpretive review highlights the dearth of empirical literature around organisational culture and therefore its findings can only be tentative. There is a need for health policymakers and health system researchers to conduct further analysis of organisational culture and change within the health system.

What Is Resilience and How Can It Be Nurtured? A Systematic Review of Empirical Literature on Organizational Resilience.

BACKGROUND: Recent health system shocks such as the Ebola outbreak of 2014-2016 and the global financial crisis of 2008 have generated global health interest in the concept of resilience. The concept is however not new, and has been applied to other sectors for a longer period of time. We conducted a review of empirical literature from both the health and other sectors to synthesize evidence on organizational resilience. METHODS: We systematically searched for literature in PubMed, Econlit, EBSCOHOST databases, google, and Google Scholar and manually searched the reference lists of selected papers. We identified 34 papers that met our inclusion criteria. We analysed data from the selected papers by thematic review. RESULTS: Resilience was generally taken to mean a system's ability to continue to meet its objectives in the face of challenges. The concepts of resilience that were used in the selected papers emphasized not just a system's capacity to withstand shocks, but also to adapt and transform. The resilience of organizations was influenced by the following factors: Material resources, preparedness and planning, information management, collateral pathways and redundancy, governance processes, leadership practices, organizational culture, human capital, social networks and collaboration. CONCLUSION: A common theme across the selected papers is the recognition of resilience as an emergent property of complex adaptive systems. Resilience is both a function of planning for and preparing for future crisis (planned resilience), and adapting to chronic stresses and acute shocks (adaptive resilience). Beyond resilience to acute shocks, the resilience of health systems to routine and chronic stress (everyday resilience) is also key. Health system software is as, if not more important, as its hardware in nurturing health system resilience.