Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background In the last two decades, cesarean section (CS) deliveries in India have increased by six-fold and created economic hardship for families and households. Although several schemes and policies under the National Health Mission (NHM) have reduced the inequality in the use of maternal care services in India, the distributive effect of public health subsidies on CS deliveries remains unclear. In this context, this paper examines the usage patterns of CS delivery and estimates the share of public health subsidies on CS deliveries among mothers by different background characteristics in India. Data Data from the fourth round of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) was used for the study. Out-of-pocket (OOP) payment for CS delivery was used as a dependent variable and was analyzed by level of care that is, primary (PHC, UHC, other) and secondary (government/municipal, rural hospital). Descriptive statistics, binary logistic regression, benefit incidence analysis, concentration curve and concentration index were used for the analysis. Results A strong economic gradient was observed in the utilization of CS delivery from public health facilities. Among mothers using any public health facility, 23% from the richest quintile did not pay for CS delivery compared to 13% from the poorest quintile. The use of the public subsidy among mothers using any type of public health facility for CS delivery was pro-rich in nature; 9% in the poorest quintile, 16.1% in the poorer, 24.5% in the middle, 27.5% among richer and 23% in the richest quintile. The pattern of utilization and distribution of public subsidy was similar across the primary and secondary health facilities but the magnitude varied. The findings from the benefit-incidence analysis are supported by those obtained from the inequality analysis. The concentration index of CS was 0.124 for public health centers and 0.291 for private health centers. The extent of inequality in the use of CS delivery in public health centers was highest in the state of Mizoram (0.436), followed by Assam (0.336), and the lowest in Tamil Nadu (0.060), followed by Kerala (0.066). Conclusion The utilization of CS services from public health centers in India is pro-rich. Periodically monitoring and evaluating of the cash incentive schemes for CS delivery and generating awareness among the poor would increase the use of CS delivery services in public health centers and reduce the inequality in CS delivery in India.

This study provides a diagnostic of the benefit incidence and targeting performance of a large number of social programs in Ghana. Both broad-based programs (such as spending for education and health, and subsidies for food, oil-related products and electricity) as well as targetd programs (such as LEAP, the indigent exemption under the NHIS, school lunches and uniforms, or fertilizer subsidies) are considered. In addition, the study provides tools and recommendations for better targeting of those programs in the future. The tools include new maps and data sets for geographic targeting according to poverty and food security, as well as ways to implement proxy means-testing. The purpose of this introductory chapter is to provide a brief synthesis of the key findings and messages from the study.

Unfair differences in healthcare access, utilisation, quality or health outcomes exist between and within countries around the world. Improving health equity is a stated objective for many governments and international organizations. We provide an overview of the major tools that have been developed to measure, evaluate and promote health equity, along with the data required to operationalise them. Methods are organised into four key policy questions facing decision-makers: (i) what is the current level of inequity in health; (ii) does government health expenditure benefit the worst-off; (iii) can government health expenditure more effectively promote equity; and (iv) which interventions provide the best value for money in reducing inequity. Benefit incidence analysis can be used to estimate the distribution of current public health sector expenditure, with geographical resource allocation formulae and health system reform being the main government policy levers for improving equity. Techniques from the economic evaluation literature, such as extended and distributional cost-effectiveness analysis can be used to identify ‘best buy’ interventions from a health equity perspective. A range of inequality metrics, from gap measures and slope indices to concentration indices and regression analysis, can be applied to these approaches to evaluate changes in equity. Methods from the economics literature can provide policymakers with a toolkit for addressing multiple aspects of health equity, from outcomes to financial protection, and can be adapted to accommodate data commonly available in low- and middle-income settings.

Abstract Cambodia’s healthcare system has seen significant improvements in the last two decades. Despite this, access to quality care remains problematic, particularly for poor rural Cambodians. The government has committed to universal health coverage (UHC) and is reforming the health financing system to align with this goal. The extent to which the reforms have impacted the poor is not always clear. Using a system-wide approach, this study assesses how benefits from healthcare spending are distributed across socioeconomic groups in Cambodia. Benefit incidence analysis was employed to assess the distribution of benefits from health spending. Primary data on the use of health services and the costs associated with it were collected through a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of 5000 households. Secondary data from the 2012–14 Cambodia National Health Accounts and other official documents were used to estimate the unit costs of services. The results indicate that benefits from health spending at the primary care level in the public sector are distributed in favour of the poor, with about 32% of health centre benefits going to the poorest population quintile. Public hospital outpatient benefits are quite evenly distributed across all wealth quintiles, although the concentration index of −0.058 suggests a moderately pro-poor distribution. Benefits for public hospital inpatient care are substantially pro-poor. The private sector was significantly skewed towards the richest quintile. Relative to health need, the distribution of total benefits in the public sector is pro-poor while the private sector is relatively pro-rich. Looking across the entire health system, health financing in Cambodia appears to benefit the poor more than the rich but a significant proportion of spending remains in the private sector which is largely pro-rich. There is the need for some government regulation of the private sector if Cambodia is to achieve its UHC goals.

Background Zambia has invested in several healthcare financing reforms aimed at achieving universal access to health services. Several evaluations have investigated the effects of these reforms on the utilization of health services. However, only one study has assessed the distributional incidence of health spending across different socioeconomic groups, but without differentiating between public and overall health spending and between curative and maternal health services. Our study aims to fill this gap by undertaking a quasi-longitudinal benefit incidence analysis of public and overall health spending between 2006 and 2014. Methods We conducted a Benefit Incidence Analysis (BIA) to measure the socioeconomic inequality of public and overall health spending on curative services and institutional delivery across different health facility typologies at three time points. We combined data from household surveys and National Health Accounts. Results Results showed that public (concentration index of − 0.003; SE 0.027 in 2006 and − 0.207; SE 0.011 in 2014) and overall (0.050; SE 0.033 in 2006 and − 0.169; SE 0.011 in 2014) health spending on curative services tended to benefit the poorer segments of the population while public (0.241; SE 0.018 in 2007 and 0.120; SE 0.007 in 2014) and overall health spending (0.051; SE 0.022 in 2007 and 0.116; SE 0.007 in 2014) on institutional delivery tended to benefit the least-poor. Higher inequalities were observed at higher care levels for both curative and institutional delivery services. Conclusion Our findings suggest that the implementation of UHC policies in Zambia led to a reduction in socioeconomic inequality in health spending, particularly at health centres and for curative care. Further action is needed to address existing barriers for the poor to benefit from health spending on curative services and at higher levels of care.

Background Rapid ageing of the population and increasing non-communicable diseases (NCDs) among the elderly is one of the major public health challenges in India. To achieve the Universal Health Coverage, ever-growing elderly population should have access to needed healthcare, and they should not face any affordability related challenge. As most of the elderly suffers from NCDs and achieving health-equity is a priority, this paper aims to - study the utilization pattern of healthcare services for treatment of NCDs among the elderly; estimate the burden of out-of-pocket expenditure for the treatment of NCDs among the elderly and analyze the extent of equity in distribution of public subsidy for the NCDs among the elderly. Methods National Sample Survey data (71st round) has been used for the study. Exploratory data analysis and benefit incidence analysis have been applied to estimate the utilization, out-of-pocket expenditure and distribution of public subsidy among economic classes. Concentration curves and indices are also estimated. Results Results show that public-sector hospitalization for NCDs among the elderly has a pro-rich trend in rural India. However, in urban sector, for both inpatient and outpatient care the poorest class has substantial share in utilization of public facilities. Same result is also observed for rural outpatient care. Analysis shows that out-of-pocket expenditure is very high for both medicine and medical care even in public facilities for all economic groups. It is also observed that medicine has the highest share in total medical expenses during treatment of NCDs among the elderly in both the region. Benefit incidence analysis shows that the public subsidy has a pro-rich distribution for inpatient care treatment in both the sectors. In case of outpatient care, subsidy share is the maximum among the richest in the urban sector and in the rural region the poorest class gets the maximum subsidy benefit. Conclusions It is evident that a substantial share of the public subsidies is still going to the richer sections for the treatment of NCDs among the elderly. Evidences also suggest that procuring medicines and targeted policies for the elderly are needed to improve utilization and equity in the public healthcare system.

There is a global challenge for health systems to ensure equity in both the delivery and financing of health care. However, many African countries still do not have equitable health systems. Traditionally, equity in the delivery and the financing of health care are assessed separately, in what may be termed 'partial' analyses. The current debate on countries moving toward universal health systems, however, requires a holistic understanding of equity in both the delivery and the financing of health care. The number of studies combining these aspects to date is limited, especially in Africa. An assessment of overall health system equity involves assessing health care financing in relation to the principles of contributing to financing according to ability to pay and benefiting from health services according to need for care. Currently South Africa is considering major health systems restructuring toward a universal system. This paper examines together, for both the public and the private sectors, equity in the delivery and financing of health care in South Africa. Using nationally representative datasets and standard methodologies for assessing progressivity in health care financing and benefit incidence, this paper reports an overall progressive financing system but a pro-rich distribution of health care benefits. The progressive financing system is driven mainly by progressive private medical schemes that cover a small portion of the population, mainly the rich. The distribution of health care benefits is not only pro-rich, but also not in line with the need for health care; richer groups receive a far greater share of service benefits within both public and private sectors despite having a relatively lower share of the ill-health burden. The importance of the findings for the design of a universal health system is discussed.

Background Many countries implementing pro-poor reforms to expand subsidized health care, especially for the poor, recognize that high-quality healthcare, and not just access alone, is necessary to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. As the poor are more likely to use low quality health services, measures to improve access to health care need to emphasise quality as the cornerstone to achieving equity goals. Current methods to evaluate health systems financing equity fail to take into account measures of quality. This paper aims to provide a worked example of how to adapt a popular quantitative approach, Benefit Incidence Analysis (BIA), to incorporate a quality weighting into the computation of public subsidies for health care. Methods We used a dataset consisting of a sample of households surveyed in 10 provinces of Indonesia in early-2018. In parallel, a survey of public health facilities was conducted in the same geographical areas, and information about health facility infrastructure and basic equipment was collected. In each facility, an index of service readiness was computed as a measure of quality. Individuals who reported visiting a primary health care facility in the month before the interview were matched to their chosen facility. Standard BIA and an extended BIA that adjusts for service quality were conducted. Results Quality scores were relatively high across all facilities, with an average of 82%. Scores for basic equipment were highest, with an average score of 99% compared to essential medicines with an average score of 60%. Our findings from the quality-weighted BIA show that the distribution of subsidies for public primary health care facilities became less ‘pro-poor’ while private clinics became more ‘pro-rich’ after accounting for quality of care. Overall the distribution of subsidies became significantly pro-rich (CI = 0.037). Conclusions Routine collection of quality indicators that can be linked to individuals is needed to enable a comprehensive understanding of individuals’ pathways of care. From a policy perspective, accounting for quality of care in health financing assessment is crucial in a context where quality of care is a nationwide issue. In such a context, any health financing performance assessment is likely to be biased if quality is not accounted for.

Background The distribution of healthcare services should be based on the needs of the population, regardless of their ability to pay. Achieving universal health coverage implies first ensuring that people of all income levels have access to quality healthcare, and then allocating resources reasonably considering individual need. Hence, this study aims to understand how public benefits in Bangladesh are currently distributed among wealth quintiles considering different layers of healthcare facilities and to assess the distributional impact of public benefits. Methods To conduct this study, data were extracted from the recent Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2017–18. We performed benefit incidence analysis to determine the distribution of maternal and child healthcare utilization in relation to wealth quintiles. Disaggregated and national-level public benefit incidence analysis was conducted by the types of healthcare services, levels of healthcare facilities, and overall utilization. Concentration curves and concentration indices were estimated to measure the equity in benefits distribution. Results An unequal utilization of public benefits observed among the wealth quintiles for maternal and child healthcare services across the different levels of healthcare facilities in Bangladesh. Overall, upper two quintiles (richest 19.8% and richer 21.7%) utilized more benefits from public facilities compared to the lower two quintiles (poorest 18.9% and poorer 20.1%). Benefits utilization from secondary level of health facilities was highly pro-rich, while benefit utilization found pro-poor at primary levels. The public benefits in Bangladesh were also not distributed according to the needs of the population; nevertheless, poorest 20% household cannot access 20% share of public benefits in most of the maternal and child healthcare services even if we ignore their needs. Conclusions Benefit incidence analysis in public health spending demonstrates the efficacy with which the government allocates constrained health resources to satisfy the needs of the poor. Public health spending in Bangladesh on maternal and child healthcare services were not equally distributed among wealth quintiles. Overall health benefits were more utilized by the rich relative to the poor. Hence, policymakers should prioritize redistribution of resources by targeting the socioeconomically vulnerable segments of the population to increase their access to health services to meet their health needs.

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