Nader Markazi Moghaddam, Aidin Aryankhesal, Mohammad Arab
BACKGROUND: Liberalization and decentralization of public sector has been triggered in some developing countries and in Iran by the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME) that granted autonomy to 54 public hospitals. However, establishment of such a complex organizational reform was rather unsuccessful. We aimed to explore the obstacles and barriers caused such a failure and their mechanisms. METHODS: Using a qualitative approach in 2013, we consulted key informants at the autonomous hospitals and their affiliating universities. Data collection was done within two phases: (i) 276 unstructured questionnaires asking respondents of barriers, and (ii) 23 semi-structured interviews from the first phase's key respondents. The first phase data were analyzed using thematic analysis and the second's by framework approach based on the frame shaped at the first phase. RESULTS: Nine obstacles were recognized including "autonomous hospitals' board composition", "delay in announcing autonomous hospitals' charges by the MOHME", "lack of financing by the committed organizations", "poor follow up for implementation of the reform", "irregular board meetings", "lack of an external overseer", "shortage of full-time physicians", "lack of management stability", and "health insurance organizations' delayed payments". CONCLUSION: The MOHME and insurance organizations did not pay the reform expenses. There were some competing motives as well to slow the reform or to shut it down. The stages of policy formulation and implementation were done separately in Iran, so this big organizational reform encountered serious obstacles.
Background: In 2004, the health system in Iran initiated an organizational reform aiming to increase the autonomy \nof teaching hospitals and make them more decentralized. The policy led to the formation of a board of trustees in \neach hospital and significant modifications in hospitals’ financing. Since the reform aimed to improve its predecessor \npolicy (implementation of hospital autonomy began in 1995), it expected to increase user satisfaction, as well as \nenhance effectiveness and efficiency of healthcare services in targeted hospitals. However, such expectations were \nnever realized. In this research, we explored the perceptions and views of expert stakeholders as to why the board of \ntrustees’ policy did not achieve its perceived objectives. \nMethods:We conducted 47 semi-structured face-to-face interviews and two focus group discussions (involving 8 \nand 10 participants, respectively) with experts at high, middle, and low levels of Iran’s health system, using purposive \nand snowball sampling. We also collected a comprehensive set of relevant documents. Interviews were transcribed \nverbatim and analyzed thematically, following a mixed inductive-deductive approach. \nResults: Three main themes emerged from the analysis. The implementation approach (including the processes, views \nabout the policy and the links between the policy components), using research evidence about the policy (local and \nglobal), and policy context (health system structure, health insurers capacity, hospitals’ organization and capacity \nand actors’ interrelationships) affected the policy outcomes. Overall, the implementation of hospital decentralization \npolicies in Iran did not seem to achieve their intended targets as a result of assumed failure to take full consideration \nof the above factors in policy implementation into account. \nConclusion:The implementation of the board of trustees’ policy did not achieve its desired goals in teaching hospitals \nin Iran. Similar decentralization policies in the past and their outcomes were overlooked, while the context was not \nprepared appropriately and key stakeholders, particularly the government, did not support the decentralization of \nIran’s health system.
In 1991, Indonesia began a process of decentralization in the health sector which had implications for the country's public hospitals. The public hospitals were given greater authority to manage their own personnel, finance and procurement, with which they were allowed to operate commercial sections in addition to offering public services. These public services are subsidized by the government, although patients still pay certain proportion of fees. The main objectives of health sector decentralization are to increase the ability of public hospitals to cover their costs and to reduce government subsidies. This study investigates the consequences of decentralization on cost recovery rate of public hospitals at district level. We examine five service units (inpatient, outpatient, operating room, laboratory and radiology) in three public hospitals. We find that after 20 years of decentralization, district hospitals still depend on government subsidies, demonstrated by the fact that the cost recovery rate of most service units is less than one. The commercial sections fail to play their role as revenue generator as they are still subsidized by the government. We also find that the bulk of costs are made up of staff salaries and incentives in all units except radiology. As this study constitutes exploratory research, further investigation is needed to find out the reasons behind these results.
This paper examines how organization and financing of maternal health services influence health-seeking behavior in Bosomtwe district, Ghana. It contributes in furthering the discussions on maternal health-seeking behavior and health outcomes from a health system perspective in sub-Saharan Africa. From a health system standpoint, the paper first presents the resources, organization and financing of maternal health service in Ghana, and later uses case study examples to explain how Ghana's health system has shaped maternal health-seeking behavior of women in the district. The paper employs a qualitative case study technique to build a complex and holistic picture, and report detailed views of the women in their natural setting. A purposeful sampling technique is applied to select 16 women in the district for this study. Through face-to-face interviews and group discussions with the selected women, comprehensive and in-depth information on health- seeking behavior and health outcomes are elicited for the analysis. The study highlights that characteristics embedded in decentralization and provision of free maternal health care influence health-seeking behavior. Particularly, the use of antenatal care has increased after the delivery exemption policy in Ghana. Interestingly, the study also reveals certain social structures, which influence women's attitude towards their decisions and choices of health facilities.
OBJECTIVE: China's ongoing new health reform aims to reduce individual out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for healthcare services. The aim of this article is to analyse the impact of this reform and to draw policy implications. METHODS: Data are retrieved from the relevant government publications. Polynomial regression models are used to predict future health expenditures. An extensive sensitivity analysis is conducted to investigate the ratios of OOP payments to the total health expenditures (THEs) and to the disposable personal income (DPI) for 2009-11 under different scenarios of cost projections and personal income distributions. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses are carried out to draw conclusions. RESULTS: The ratios of OOP payments to THE and DPI vary significantly across scenarios tested. Only if all committed government investments and social health expenditure are realized can China's new health reform reduce both ratios and achieve its target goals. In particular, the ratio of OOP payments to DPI can also be significantly reduced by improving income distribution. Due to the complicated interplay among different cost components in health expenditures, these two ratios may not change in the same direction, indicating that both need to be examined when evaluating the reform. CONCLUSION: The new health reform in China aims to alleviate the high OOP payments for healthcare services, but it has not yet been able to reduce both OOP-to-THE and OOP-to-DPI ratios simultaneously. Major reasons include (1) inability of local governments to fulfil their responsible investments due to health finance decentralization and uneven economic development in China and (2) a serious cost inflation in health expenditures coupled with a low level of income distribution. It is suggested that the central government should bear more financial responsibility and assist local governments to fully invest, and should improve individual incomes, in particular for the poor.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate implementation of the National Essential Medicines Scheme (NEMS) in rural China. METHODS: Two rural counties/districts in each of three provinces where NEMS had been implemented were surveyed. Information was collected from NEMS staff at the province, county/district, township and village levels; patients with chronic disease were also interviewed. Service provision, finances, prescriptions, inpatient records and the expenditures of patients with certain diagnoses were investigated in township hospitals and village clinics. The results were compared with the corresponding data recorded before NEMS was introduced. FINDINGS: Following the introduction of NEMS, drug procurement in each study location was systematized. Total drug costs declined. This, and improved prescribing, reduced the costs of outpatient and inpatient care and led, apparently, to increased uptake of health services. However, the prices of some drugs had increased and the availability of others had declined. The compensation of health-care providers for NEMS-related reductions in their incomes had been largely ineffective. As a result of the introduction of NEMS, health facilities relied more on public financing. Many health-care providers complained about higher workloads and lower incomes. CONCLUSION: Although it was well conceived, the introduction of NEMS into China's decentralized, fee-for-service system of health care has not been straightforward. It has highlighted the problems associated with attempts to modernize health care and health financing for patients' benefit. Sustainable mechanisms to compensate health-care providers for lost income are needed to ensure that NEMS is a success.
INTRODUCTION: In recent years, the country of Mongolia (population 2.8 million) has experienced rapid social changes associated with economic growth, persisting socio-economic inequities and internal migration. In order to improve health access for the urban poor, the Ministry of Health developed a "Reaching Every District" strategy (RED strategy) to deliver an integrated package of key health and social services. The aim of this article is to present findings of an assessment of the implementation of the RED strategy, and, on the basis of this assessment, articulate lessons learned for equitable urban health planning. METHODS: Principal methods for data collection and analysis included literature review, barrier analysis of health access and in-depth interviews and group discussions with health managers and providers. FINDINGS: The main barriers to health access for the urban poor relate to interacting effects of poverty, unhealthy daily living environments, social vulnerability and isolation. Implementation of the RED strategy has resulted in increased health access for the urban poor, as demonstrated by health staff having reached new clients with immunization, family planning and ante-natal care services, and increased civil registrations which enable social service provision. Organizational effects have included improved partnerships for health and increased motivation of the health workforce. Important lessons learned from the early implementation of the RED strategy include the need to form strong partnerships among stakeholders at each level of the health system and in the community, as well as the need to develop a specific financing strategy to address the needs of the very poor. The diverse social context for health in an urban poor setting calls for a decentralized planning and partnership strategy, but with central level commitment towards policy guidance and financing of pro-poor urban health strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Lessons from Mongolia mirror other international studies which point to the need to measure and take action on the social determinants of health at the local area level in order to adequately reduce persistent inequities in health care access for the urban poor.
Jan Klavus, Ilkka Vohlonen, Juha Kinnunen, Veli Koistinen · 5 authors
The Finnish health care system is financed in a highly decentralized manner. In the tax-financed Beveridge model each municipality is responseble for financing and organizing health care services for its residents. This paper examined the annual incidence and treatment costs of three cost-intensive DRG-groups, and all DRG-groups together. The objective was to estimate municipal level predictions on the incidence of new illness cases and their associated costs, and to analyze whether there was greater uncertainty in anticipated specialized health care costs in municipalities with smaller populations. The dataset comprised of longitudinal hospital utilization and discharge data from Hospital Discharge Registers. The expected annual variation of illness cases and costs was assessed with respect to 95% confidence intervals estimated for each morbidity group and municipality. The results indicated that the costs of the selected morbidity groups fluctuated in a completely uncontrollable manner in municipalities with small populations. As the median size of Finnish municipalities is less than 6000, the inability to anticipate periodic health care costs constitutes an extensive financial problem and calls for the establishment of larger regional units and funding pools.
OBJECTIVE: Scaling up antiretroviral treatment (ART) through decentralization of HIV care is increasingly recommended as a strategy toward ensuring equitable access to treatment. However, there have been hitherto few attempts to empirically examine the performance of this policy, and particularly its role in protecting against the risk of catastrophic health expenditures (CHE). This article therefore seeks to assess whether HIV care decentralization has a protective effect against the risk of CHE associated with HIV infection. DATA SOURCE AND STUDY DESIGN: We use primary data from the cross-sectional EVAL-ANRS 12-116 survey, conducted in 2006-2007 among a random sample of 3,151 HIV-infected outpatients followed up in 27 hospitals in Cameroon. DATA COLLECTION AND METHODS: Data collected contain sociodemographic, economic, and clinical information on patients as well as health care supply-related characteristics. We assess the determinants of CHE among the ART-treated patients using a hierarchical logistic model (n = 2,412), designed to adequately investigate the separate effects of patients and supply-related characteristics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Expenditures for HIV care exceed 17 percent of household income for 50 percent of the study population. After adjusting for individual characteristics and technological level, decentralization of HIV services emerges as the main health system factor explaining interclass variance, with a protective effect on the risk of CHE. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that HIV care decentralization is likely to enhance equity in access to ART. Decentralization appears, however, to be a necessary but insufficient condition to fully remove the risk of CHE, unless other innovative reforms in health financing are introduced.
Lizardo Huamán-Angulo, Lindaura Liendo-Lucano, Manuel Núñez
Los recursos humanos son el eje del accionar del sector salud; sin embargo, no necesariamente son el aspecto mejor atendido, por ello el Ministerio de Salud del Perú (MINSA) conjuntamente con los gobiernos regionales generó el Plan Sectorial Concertado y Descentralizado para el Desarrollo de Capacidades en Salud 2010-2014 (PLANSALUD) con el propósito de fortalecer las capacidades de los Recursos Humanos en Salud (RHUS) y contribuir para que la atención de salud se desarrolle con eficiencia, calidad, pertinencia, equidad e interculturalidad en el marco de la descentralización, el Aseguramiento Universal de la Salud (AUS) y las políticas de la salud. Con ese objeto se han propuesto tres componentes (asistencia técnica, capacitación y articulación educación - salud) que agrupan a un conjunto importante de intervenciones, las cuales son planteadas y definidas de acuerdo al contexto nacional, regional y local, contribuyendo de ese modo a la mejora de las capacidades de gobierno, de gestión por competencias y la prestación de servicios de salud. El presente artículo muestra una primera aproximación de PLANSALUD, incluyendo aspectos relacionados a su planificación, gestión, financiamiento, estructura y funcionamiento, así como las medidas de monitoreo y evaluación.<br>Human resources are the backbone of health sector actions; however, they are not necessarily the area with the greatest attention, therefore, the Ministry of Health of Peru (MINSA) together with regional governments, led the Decentralized and Agreed Sector Plan for the Capacity Development in Health 2010-2014 (PLANSALUD) with the aim of strengthening the capacities of Human Resources for Health (HRH) and contribute to health care efficient development, quality, relevance, equity and multiculturalism, in the context of descentralization, the Universal Health Insurance (AUS) and health policies. To achieve this goal, they have proposed three components (technical assistance, joint training and education - health articulation) that bring together an important set of interventions, which are planned and defined according to the national, regional and local levels, thus contributing to improve the government capacity, capability management and delivery of health services. This paper presents a first approach of PLANSALUD, including aspects related to planning, management, financing, structure and functioning, as well as monitoring and evaluation measures.
Health care is widely considered to be an important determinant of health. The health care systems of Western Europe have recently experienced significant reforms, under pressure from economic globalization. Similarly, in Eastern Europe, health care reforms have been undertaken in response to the demands of the new market economy. Both of these changes may influence equality in health outcomes. This article aims to identify the mechanisms through which health care may affect inequalities. The authors conducted a literature review of the effects on health inequalities of European health care reforms. Particular reference was paid to interventions in the fields of financing and pooling, allocation, purchasing, and provision of services. The majority of studies were from Western Europe, and the outcomes most often examined were access to services or income distribution. Overall, the quality of research was poor, confirming the need to develop an appropriate impact assessment methodology. Few studies were related to pooling, allocation, or purchasing. For financing and purchasing, the studies showed that publicly funded universal health care reduces the impact of ill health on income distribution, while insurance systems can increase inequalities in access to care. Out-of-pocket payments increase inequalities in access to care and contribute to impoverishment. Decentralizing health services can lead to geographic inequalities in health care access. Nationalized, publicly funded health care systems are most effective at reducing inequalities in access and reducing the effects on health of income distribution.
There is an avalanche of interest in health systems with countries, donors, international experts and academic institutions all rushing to promote, fund or build capacity to address this wave of interest. As Anne Mills documents in an article in this volume, there is also a growing literature on how to think about health systems, how to use research on health systems to improve their performance, and pleas for greater investment in knowledge about health systems. We are probably riding on the crest of this new wave and it will be important to make use of it to further our knowledge about how to achieve health system effectiveness. With continuing global economic uncertainty, this wave may pass if we do not take advantage of it now. It is useful to reflect on why there is such interest in this theme now. There are probably many converging causes but the most important, to my mind, is a replay of an old debate between vertical programmes and horizontal, integrated approaches that has experienced swings of interest at least since the Alma Ata Conference in 1978 emphasized the integrated primary health care approach. During the last decade or more, there has been a major focus on vertical disease-specific programmes supported by greatly increased funding from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI), US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, among other donors. The major claim of these programmes was that by focusing on clear disease-specific objectives they would be more effective in shorter time periods and they could be held more accountable to donors (since the results could be more measurable) than the difficult and diverse efforts to improve the many elements of a health system through the horizontal integrated approach. While there were evident successes in these programmes, there was also a growing recognition that health system constraints—especially in human resources and logistics systems—were becoming major obstacles to achieving even their limited objectives of increased coverage of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and immunizations. With the added emphasis on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the slow progress toward their achievement in many countries, the international community and national governments have turned increasingly toward attempting to reduce the health system constraints—an approach that is closer to the integrated horizontal approach. Both GAVI and the Global Fund have added a separate fund for health systems interventions. In 2008, the G8 called for greater attention to health system strengthening as compatible with the prior focus on vertical programmes (Reich et al. 2008). In 2009, the World Bank convened a seminar on health system strengthening attended by representatives from the World Health Organization (WHO), GAVI and Global Fund. A task force on Healthy Women and Healthy Children calling for a health system funding platform was initiated at the UN General Assembly. In 2010, the WHO and others sponsored the First Global Symposium on Health Systems Research in Montreux, Switzerland. While many observers are trying to argue that the two approaches are now more compatible, at least in rhetorical terms it seems that the pendulum is shifting toward greater attention to health system strengthening. So how do we, the readers of Health Policy and Planning, take advantage of this interest? Health Policy and Planning is dedicated to the publication of high quality research that, as the name implies, improves decisions on policy and planning. This poses for us a central question: how can we do research that will improve health systems? The answer is complex for it requires attention to the kind of knowledge that is both researchable and leads to practical, implementable recommendations. The place to start is with a framework of analysis that is both analytical, in that it provides empirically based categories about health systems, and purposive, in that it is oriented toward how to improve the system. Many of the frameworks that are available provide a recognizable set of functional issues whose boundaries help focus attention on specific interactions that can be studied, such as financing, service delivery, human resources, governance (Mills et al. 2001). The WHO Building Blocks framework is a very popular approach that is guiding much of the discussion and research in health systems (WHO 2007). Another approach developed by Harvard School of Public Health faculty is oriented toward using analytical categories in a purposive manner that starts with an ethically derived vision of what we would like to achieve, and works back toward finding the reasons why we have not achieved those objectives. It then focuses our attention on what we can change using evidence on the effectiveness of changing different ‘control knobs’ or policy levers, including financing, payments, organization, regulation and persuasion (Roberts et al. 2004). There is a great deal of overlap in these models and they are compatible in many ways that can guide research toward practical recommendations for policy. A second question is about levels of analysis. Should we attempt to research whole national systems, with typologies of systems and comparisons of the achievements of the different models? We often hear this orientation used in policy arguments such as the recent arguments over whether the USA should adopt the Canadian single payer model. However, this approach suffers from methodological challenges such as the ‘small number’ problem (which limits the ability to use sophisticated quantitative analysis due to the few comparable national systems) and the many different characteristics and historical trajectories that confound the analysis. Few countries—Chile, China, Colombia, Ghana, Taiwan, Turkey and Eastern European countries—have even attempted broad multifaceted health system reforms and they have tended to develop their own reform models rather than copying others. Nevertheless, there are many country studies of health reforms that provide evidence and much can be gained by detailed evaluation of the effectiveness of these models that can inform policy choice in different contexts. An alternative means of assessing health systems is to focus on sub-systems or analysis of specific policy changes, focusing on different social health insurance approaches, pay for performance, contracting, decentralization or other reforms, and assessing their performance in terms of achieving health system objectives like the MDGs, reduction in catastrophic expenditures caused by paying for illness, or broader responsiveness and accountability to citizens. The advantage of this approach is that, if the research is well designed, the causality of the impact of the changes on health system objectives can be more clearly demonstrated, and it allows a more focused attention to policy changes that different countries can adopt in an incremental way. This approach can address both systems issues and vertical programme needs. For instance, the work that I am involved in on decentralization—looking at the relationship between choice, capacity and accountability at different levels of a health system—can be used to make policy recommendations on general health system reform as well as specific reforms of logistic systems, vertical immunization or family planning programme effectiveness (Bossert et al. 2007). The challenge in this approach is to account for the general national context factors—political, economic, social and cultural—which may influence the performance of these initiatives. What works in Chile may not work in China due to many different characteristics of the country contexts. This is a major lacuna in the current research in health systems often covered over by focusing only on the differences in average income levels, assuming for instance that health system changes in low-income countries are all relatively similar. However, governance issues, cultural and ethical differences, past histories with different health systems, all play a role in constraining the lessons learned from one country to another. The recent concern with political economy and political institutionalism may inform future work in this area (Fox and Reich, forthcoming). In addition, focus on one subsystem or one policy lever is likely to miss the interactions among different subsystems changes that synergistically influence outcomes. For instance, changes in decentralization may be enhanced by changes in social insurance programmes, or the creation of a new cadre of health workers. Focusing on one in order to evaluate its separate impact will miss the role of the combined changes on achieving objectives. However, if we are aware of these limitations, it might be possible to move collectively toward setting a research agenda in which multidisciplinary researchers assess the different subsystems in ways that inform each other. Those of us who focus on organizational issues like decentralization and human resources need to be aware of and incorporate in our studies, the work of experts in economics, ethics, politics and other behavioural sciences, as well as epidemiologists and biostatisticians who help us understand the underlying population and social processes underpinning those systems. There is also an imbalance of research on functional areas of analysis with a much greater body of knowledge on financing and payment issues than on organizational issues and governance and regulation. In recent years, there has been greater interest in governance, politics and human resources issues, but these areas are so complex that they require much greater attention and more funded research than is currently in the pipeline. This poses an additional requirement for multidisciplinary studies that address these under-researched areas to bring the level of knowledge up to that of the more economic themes. This is a huge task of course and current funders have little patience for large research projects in health systems. Indeed there is considerable pressure for evaluating the performance of programmes and projects that have been funded in a very short and unrealistic time frame. It suggests that we need to be nimble and develop cadres of multidisciplinary experts to be able to quickly do the solid research necessary but within limited funds and short time horizons to provide well-documented policy recommendations. If we do not, we are likely to have missed the opportunities of this wave of interest as funding for health systems declines due to alternative priorities, donor fatigue or general global economic restrictions. None declared.
Shoba Raja, Sarah Wood, Victoria de Menil, Saju C Mannarath
BACKGROUND: Limited evidence about mental health finances in low and middle-income countries is a key challenge to mental health care policy initiatives. This study aimed to map mental health finances in Ghana, Uganda, India (Kerala state), Sri Lanka and Lao PDR focusing on how much money is available for mental health, how it is spent, and how this impacts mental health services. METHODS: A researcher in each region reviewed public mental health-related budgets and interviewed key informants on government mental health financing. A total of 43 key informant interviews were conducted. Quantitative data was analyzed in an excel matrix using descriptive statistics. Key informant interviews were coded a priori against research questions. RESULTS: National ring-fenced budgets for mental health as a percentage of national health spending for 2007-08 is 1.7% in Sri Lanka, 3.7% in Ghana, 2.0% in Kerala (India) and 6.6% in Uganda. Budgets were not available in Lao PDR. The majority of ring-fenced budgets (76% to 100%) is spent on psychiatric hospitals. Mental health spending could not be tracked beyond the psychiatric hospital level due to limited information at the health centre and community levels. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health budget information should be tracked and made publically accessible. Governments can adapt WHO AIMS indicators for reviewing national mental health finances. Funding allocations work more effectively through decentralization. Mental health financing should reflect new ideas emerging from community based practice in LMICs.
Decentralization involves the dispersion of power, functions and finances from a central authority to regional and local authorities. Decentralization reforms have become widespread in low- and middle-income countries, mainly due to movements towards democratiza-tion, the spread of multi-party electoral systems and transitions towards market economies. In particular, decentraliza-tion of financing systems, particularly for health, is now a common aspect of reform in these countries. The main advantage is the dynamism it can bring into the resource allocation mechanism; it also can facilitate re-allocation of funds through a visible, vibrant and bottom-up approach.
This paper is part ofa research program supported by the Health Research Institute for Health Security, with the objectives to monitor and evaluate the efficiency of health subdistrict offices in Thailand. Cost efficiency was empirically investigated based on primary surveyed data comprising 246 units operated in 12 provinces. First, descriptive statistics related to outputs (4 variables) and cost (3 variables inclusive of wages and salaries, compensation to officers, and operating expenses) are presented and discussed. All revenue and expense figures refer to fiscal year 2008. Two types of efficiency models (namely SCF and DEA) based an the input-orientation approach were applied to estimate the efficiency scores. We found that 45 units lied on the cost frontier and that represented 18 percent of the total units; in most cases, efficiency scores (DEA, VRS assumption) ranged from 0.60 to 0.75 and averaged to 0.69-implying that there was an ample room for cost-saving, specifically 31 percent, ifoutput slack or excess input were eliminated thus implying the scope for management improvement. Our estimates should be considered preliminary and an in-depth investigation needs to be taken in order further to understand the special circumstances and uncontrollable factors that might have affected the higher cost to those units, but our models failed to take note. The last section discusses policy implications and the health decentralization program in Thailand, which is a topic of policy interest. Improving the efficiency ofpublic agencies and effective public service delivery are among the goals of Thailand's public sector reform. Over the past decade, devolution of responsibilites from central agencies to local govemment units have fairly succeeded in areas of public infrastructure and social welfare-but have been less successful in primary education, public health, and environmental regulation. The transfer of the health subdistrict office is high on the national agenda, and the National Decentralization Committee strongly endorses this connection, it is important to disseminate information related to health subdistrict management, budgeting, and financing to the public, especially local administrators.
This article addresses several issues pertinent to health systems governance for health equity. It argues the importance of health systems using measures of positive health (well-being), discriminating in favour of historically less advantaged groups and weighing the costs of health care against investments in the social determinants of health. It cautions that the concept of governance could weaken the role of government, with disequalizing effects, while emphasizing the importance of two elements of good governance (transparency and participation) in health systems decision-making. It distinguishes between participation as volunteer labour and participation as exercising political rights, and questions the assumption that decentralization in health systems is necessarily empowering. It then identifies five health system roles to address issues of equity (educator/watchdog, resource broker, community developer, partnership developer and advocate/catalyst) and the implications of these roles for practice. Drawing on preliminary findings of a global research project on comprehensive primary health care, it discusses political aspects of progressive health system reform and the implications of equity-focused health system governance on health workers' roles, noting the importance of health workers claiming their identity as citizens. The article concludes with a commentary on the inherently political nature of health reforms based on equity; the necessary confrontation with power relations politics involves; and the health systems governance challenge of managing competing health discourses of efficiency and results-based financing, on the one hand, and equity and citizen empowerment, on the other.
This article discusses the model of oral health care implemented in the Unified Health System of Brazil in the last decade. This model was conceived as a sub-sector policy that, over the years, has sought to improve the quality of life of the Brazilian population. Through a chronological line, the study presents the National Policy on Oral Health as a counter-hegemonic patient care model for the dentistry practices existing in the country before this policy was implemented. The reorganization of the levels of oral health care, the creation of reference facilities for secondary and tertiary care, through Centers of Dental Specialties and Regional Dental Prosthesis Laboratories, and the differential funding and decentralized management of financial resources were able to expand the actions of oral health for more than 90 million inhabitants. The evolution shown after the deployment of the National Oral Health Policy, as of 2004, demonstrates the greater integration of oral health care under the Unified Health System and provides feedback information to help this policy to continue to be prioritized by the Federal Government and receive more support from the state and local levels in the coming years.
This paper analyses health reforms in Tanzania since 1924 to 1993 to determine how each paradigm influenced the next by using the recent World Health Organization (WHO) framework of health system. Published and gray documents were reviewed and analyzed for the four discrete attempts at reforming the health sector, focusing on the district health system decentralization. The findings revealed that for each wave, there was a review of the health system, making information from preceding efforts to be available to the subsequent reforms. After independence the political party in power played a major role in ensuring availability of information and its utilization. Predominant information in each wave showed that the health system was underfinanced, there was poor performance of PHC strategies, non-integration of DMO and poor health workers income. Health reforms should focus on health system finance, integrated district health system, health workers welfare and community participation.
Options for health financing reform are often portrayed as a choice between general taxation (known as the Beveridge model) and social health insurance (known as the Bismarck model). Ten years of health financing reform in Kyrgyzstan, since the introduction of its compulsory health insurance fund in 1997, provide an excellent example of why it is wrong to reduce health financing policy to a choice between the Beveridge and Bismarck models. Rather than fragment the system according to the insurance status of the population, as many other low- and middle-income countries have done, the Kyrgyz reforms were guided by the objective of having a single system for the entire population. Key features include the role and gradual development of the compulsory health insurance fund as the single purchaser of health-care services for the entire population using output-based payment methods, the complete restructuring of pooling arrangements from the former decentralized budgetary structure to a single national pool, and the establishment of an explicit benefit package. Central to the process was the transformation of the role of general budget revenues - the main source of public funding for health - from directly subsidizing the supply of services to subsidizing the purchase of services on behalf of the entire population by redirecting them into the health insurance fund. Through their approach to health financing policy, and pooling in particular, the Kyrgyz health reformers demonstrated that different sources of funds can be used in an explicitly complementary manner to enable the creation of a unified, universal system.
BACKGROUND: During the Suharto era public funding of health in Indonesia was low and the health services were tightly controlled by the central government; district health staff had practically no discretion over expenditure. Following the downfall of President Suharto there was a radical political, administrative and fiscal decentralization with delivery of services becoming the responsibility of district governments. In addition, public funding for health services more than doubled between 2001 and 2006. It was widely expected that services would improve as district governments now had both more adequate funds and the responsibility for services. To date there has been little improvement in services. Understanding why services have not improved requires careful study of what is happening at the district level. METHODS: We collected information on public expenditure on health services for the fiscal year 2006 in 15 districts in Java, Indonesia from the district health offices and district hospitals. Data obtained in the districts were collected by three teams, one for each province. Information on district government revenues were obtained from district public expenditure databases maintained by the World Bank using data from the Ministry of Finance. RESULTS: The public expenditure information collected in 15 districts as part of this study indicates district governments are reliant on the central government for as much as 90% of their revenue; that approximately half public expenditure on health is at the district level; that at least 40% of district level public expenditure on health is for personnel, almost all of them permanent civil servants; and that districts may have discretion over less than one-third of district public expenditure on health; the extent of discretion over spending is much higher in district hospitals than in the district health office and health centers. There is considerable variation between districts. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the promise of decentralization there has been little increase in the potential for discretion at the district level in managing public funds for health - this is likely to be an important reason for the lack of improvement in publicly funded health services. Key decisions about money are still made by the central government, and no one is held accountable for the performance of the sector - the district blames the center and the central ministries (and their ministers) are not accountable to district populations.
The right to participation is the "the right of rights"--the basic right of people to have a say in how decisions that affect their lives are made. All legally binding international human rights treaties explicitly recognize the essential role of participation in realizing fundamental human rights. While the substance of the human right to health has been extensively developed, the right to participation as one of its components has remained largely unexplored. Should rights-based health advocacy focus on participation because there is a relationship between an individual's or a community's active involvement in health care decision-making and the highest attainable standard of health? In the context of the human right to health, does participation mean primarily political participation, or should we take the right to participation to mean more specifically the right of persons, individually and as a group, to shape health care policy for society and for themselves as patients? Decentralization of health care decision-making promises greater participation through citizen involvement in setting priorities, monitoring service provision, and finding new and creative ways to finance public health programs. Between 1999 and 2008, Indonesia decentralized health care funding and delivery to regional governments, resulting in substantial exclusion of its poor and uneducated citizens from the health care system while simultaneously expanding the opportunities for political participation for educated elites. This article explores the tension between the right to participation as an underlying determinant of health and as a political right by reviewing the experience of Indonesia ten years after its decision to decentralize health care provision. It is ultimately argued that rights-based advocates must be vigilant in retaining a unified perspective on human rights, resisting the persistent tendency to separate and prioritize the civil and political aspects of participation over its social component.
Two papers in this volume focus on public finance and decentralization as central to resolving India's systemic public health crisis. However, some states and districts have achieved success despite serious financial and administrative deficits; this suggests that factors such as political commitment, community participation, human resource management, women's empowerment, and governance may be as or more important. The success of the National Rural Health Mission will depend on state and local institutional capacity, including strong partnerships with civil society organizations and private-sector actors. Increased resources and decentralization will not be sufficient by themselves.
Elmer S. Soriano, David M. Dror, Erwin Gaspar A. Alampay, Jolande
A sustainable health reinsurance system can be fashioned for the informal sector by mobilizing social and economic forces operating within individual communities. The economic analysis in part 1 of this book draws conclusions from success stories in industrial countries and failures in low- and medium-income countries. This analysis leads to the premise that decentralized development of microinsurance units, operating in a market segment left out by for-profit health insurance firms and by national schemes, can be stabilized financially through their affiliation with a reinsurance facility-Social Re' (part 1, this volume; Dror and Duru 2000, pp. 30-40; Dror 2001). Dror, Preker, and Jakab, in chapter 2 of this book, explain how the sociological dimension would theoretically affect the performance of a microinsurer. Findings of the Institute of Medicine reaffirm the active interplay of biology, psychology, behavior, and society in determining people's health attitudes. The institute further reports that, although people's attitudes and actions can readily be altered, these changes need support and reinforcement over time to guarantee better health. Attitudinal and behavioral changes are best prolonged through interventions at multiple levels, from the individual to society at large (Institute of Medicine 2001, pp. 1-1-1-8). Efforts are required to address the psychosocial factors that influence health status, including, for example, proposing measures such as microinsurance to persuade individuals to accept a healthy way of life and permanently modify their health behavior. Microinsurance schemes provide individuals, households, and communities mechanisms for financing their health through group risk-pooling mechanisms, leading to a sustained improvement in their access to health services. Higher up on the social scale, well-evaluated interventions at the organizational level should be encouraged, giving credit to organizations' vital role in influencing individual behavioL Still farther up the scale, community involvement in health-promotion strategies should not be overlooked, because some disease-related factors that are beyond an individual's capacity to modify can be significantly minimized through community efforts. Community empowerment, social support, and other values that protect members from stress are strengthened through community-level interventions. Finally, interventions at the societal level recognize the role of collective organizations influencing individuals' everyday existence (Institute of Medicine 2001, pp. 1-1-1-8). Underlying assumptions are that members' affiliation with microinsurers is voluntary (individuals can join, stay enrolled, or withdraw at will) and that microinsurers will voluntarily join Social Re. A clue is therefore needed about the considerations that shape individual and collective choices. According to one opinion, The underlying economic motivation for joining a microinsurance unit is assumed to be a desire to seek reciprocity in sustaining risk-sharing arrangements among essentially self-interested individuals (Dror and jacquier 1999, p. 79). This assumption implies that joining a microinsurance unit (and Social Re) is a predictable, rational economic choice by self-interested individuals to maximize total utility (optimal choice theory), and an act of reciprocity, in which giving and getting are somehow linked. According to the utility motive, people will join if they can benefit from joining. However, considering that many people will pay a health insurance premium without getting any cash benefits (if they stay healthy), is it really clear what each individual would consider as his or her exact utility from being insured? As Herrnstein points out, because utility cannot be directly observed, it must be inferred from behavior, from the choices individuals make. Thus, utility is synonymous with the modem concept of reinforcement in behavioral psychology (Herrnstein 1997, p. 226). Dror and Jacquier mention a second motive for joining a microinsurance unit: people's desire to improve their health by controlling their living and working conditions. This control is linked to a deep-rooted human need to seek voluntary and repeated interaction with others in daily life (Dror and Jacquier 1999, p. 80). These interactions may provide material reciprocity or they may reflect altruistic, nonmaterial interactions. The three authors mentioned above suggest that, to understand how microinsurers can attract and retain their clients, they have to know what shapes their clients' behavior in their specific operating context. The same reasoning applies to a microinsurer's decision to affiliate with Social Re. Since Social Re will be piloted in the Philippines, this examination will be done with reference to that country and culture. The rest of this chapter will provide an overview of the social and institutional structure of Philippine rural and informal society and the attitudes toward solidarity, risk, and insurance that influence choices and help shape the role of microinsurance. This role is quite different from what could be conjured from classical economic theory on utility, as will be shown. This analysis leads to the conclusion that in the rural Philippines, the introduction of insurance and reinsurance hinges as much, perhaps more, on the structure of society than on the profile of risks and the existence of a market for insurance.
Albert J. Jovell, Robert J. Blendon, María Dolors Navarro, Channtal Fleischfresser · 7 authors
BACKGROUND: Fifteen years ago, public opinion surveys in Spain showed substantial dissatisfaction with the health-care system. Since that time, health-care in Spain has undergone significant changes, including a decentralization of the system, an increase in spending and a change in the way the system is financed. OBJECTIVE: This study examines how Spanish citizens rate the performance of their health system today, both as compared with other sectors of society and as compared with earlier time periods. METHODS: Data are drawn from nationally representative telephone surveys of the non-institutionalized adult Spanish population (age 18 years and over). The study was carried out in two phases: October-November 2005 (n = 3,010) and January 2006 (n = 2,101). RESULTS: The majority of the Spanish population thinks the health system needs to be changed. The problems cited relate mostly to long wait times to get health-care. Nevertheless, over the last 15 years, the proportion of people who have very negative views about the health system has decreased by half. The majority believes that not enough money is spent on health-care, but few people would support an increase in taxes to provide additional funding. The survey finds the National Health System's institutions and health professionals to be more highly trusted than other institutions and professional groups in the country. CONCLUSIONS: Government policy-makers in Spain face a dilemma: the public wants more health spending to decrease wait times, but there is substantial resistance to increasing taxes as a means to finance improvements in the system's capacity.