Explore the vast range of titles available.

There is misunderstanding about both the meaning and the role of cost-effectiveness thresholds in policy decision making. This article dissects the main issues by use of a bookshelf metaphor. Its main conclusions are as follows: it must be possible to compare interventions in terms of their impact on a common measure of health; mere effectiveness is not a persuasive case for inclusion in public insurance plans; public health advocates need to address issues of relative effectiveness; a ‘first best’ benchmark or threshold ratio of health gain to expenditure identifies the least effective intervention that should be included in a public insurance plan; the reciprocal of this ratio – the ‘first best’ cost-effectiveness threshold – will rise or fall as the health budget rises or falls (ceteris paribus); setting thresholds too high or too low costs lives; failure to set any cost-effectiveness threshold at all also involves avertable deaths and morbidity; the threshold cannot be set independently of the health budget; the threshold can be approached from either the demand side or the supply side – the two are equivalent only in a health-maximising equilibrium; the supply-side approach generates an estimate of a ‘second best’ cost-effectiveness threshold that is higher than the ‘first best’; the second best threshold is the one generally to be preferred in decisions about adding or subtracting interventions in an established public insurance package; multiple thresholds are implied by systems having distinct and separable health budgets; disinvestment involves eliminating effective technologies from the insured bundle; differential weighting of beneficiaries’ health gains may affect the threshold; anonymity and identity are factors that may affect the interpretation of the threshold; the true opportunity cost of health care in a community, where the effectiveness of interventions is determined by their impact on health, is not to be measured in money – but in health itself.

Path-dependency theory says that complex systems, such as health systems, are shaped by prior conditions and decisions, and are resistant to change. As a result, major policy changes, such as health system reform, are often only possible in policy windows—moments of transition or contextual crisis that re-balance social power dynamics and enable the consideration of new policy ideas. However, even in policy windows there can be resistance to change. In this paper, we consider the role of ideas in constraining change. We draw on political science theory on the dynamic relationship between foreground ideas (policy programmes and frames) and background ideas (deeply held collective cognitive and normative beliefs) to better understand how ideas exert influence independently of the contextual conditions that give rise to them or the actors that espouse them. To do so, we examine two apparent policy windows in the South African National Health Insurance policy process. The analysis reveals how ideas can become institutionalised in organisations and procedures (such as policy instruments or provider networks), and in intangible cultural norms—becoming hegemonic and uncontested ideas that shape the attitudes and perspectives of policy actors. In this way, ideas operate as independent variables, constraining change across policy windows. While health policy analysts increasingly recognise the influence of ideational variables in policy processes, they tend to conceptualise ideas as tools actors wield to drive change. This analysis reveals the importance of considering ideas (values, norms, and beliefs) as persistent features of the policy-making context that constrain actors.

Abstract Cost-effectiveness thresholds are important decision rules that determine whether health interventions represent good value for money. In low- and middle-income countries, the World Health Organization (WHO) one to three times per capita gross domestic product (GDP) per disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted has been the most widely used threshold for informing resource allocation decisions. However, in 2016, the WHO withdrew recommendations for using this threshold, creating a significant vacuum in South Africa and many countries that rely on results of cost-effectiveness analyses for making resource allocation decisions. This study estimates a cost-effectiveness threshold that reflects the health opportunity cost of health spending in South Africa using a three-step approach. First, marginal returns to health spending was estimated as health spending elasticity for crude death rates using a fixed effect estimation approach. Second, the opportunity cost of health spending was estimated as DALYs averted. Finally, a cost per DALY averted threshold was estimated as the inverse of the marginal product of health spending. We show that 1% of total health spending in 2015 (equivalent to approximately ZAR 1.54 billion/USD 120.7 million) averted 1050 deaths, 34 180 years of life lost, 5880 years lived with disability and 40 055 DALYs. The cost-effectiveness threshold was estimated at approximately ZAR 38 500 (USD 3015) per DALY averted, ∼53% of South Africa’s per capita GDP in 2015 (ZAR 72 700/USD 5700) and lower than the previously recommended one to three times per capita GDP. As South Africa moves towards implementing universal health coverage reforms through National Health Insurance by 2025, the adoption of a threshold that reflects health opportunity costs will be crucial for ensuring efficiency in the allocation of scarce resources. This study provides useful insight into the magnitude of the health opportunity cost of health spending in South Africa and highlights the need for further research.

Abstract In South Africa, the introduction of a national health insurance (NHI) system is the most prominent health sector reform planned to achieve universal health coverage in the country. Primary health care (PHC) is the foundation of the proposed NHI system. This study draws on policy implementation theory and Bossert’s notion of decision space to analyse PHC facility managers’ decision space and their participation in the implementation of the Ideal Clinic Realisation and Maintenance (ICRM) programme. We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 127 PHC facility managers in two districts in Gauteng and Mpumalanga provinces. A self-administered questionnaire elicited socio-demographic information, the PHC managers’ participation in the conceptualization and implementation of the ICRM programme, their decision space and an optional open-ended question for further comments. We obtained a 100% response rate. The study found that PHC facility managers reported lack of involvement in the conceptualization of the ICRM programme, high levels of participation in implementation [mean score 5.77 (SD ±0.90), and overall decision space mean score of 2.54 (SD ±0.34)]. However, 17 and 21% of participants reported narrow decision space on the critical areas of the availability of essential medicines and on basic resuscitation equipment respectively. The qualitative data revealed the unintended negative consequences of striving for ‘ideal clinic status’, namely that of creating an illusion of compliance with the ICRM standards. The study findings suggest the need for greater investment in the health workforce, special efforts to involve frontline managers and staff in health reforms, as well as provision of adequate resources, and an enabling practice environment.

This paper investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related policy measures on livelihoods in urban South Africa. Using qualitative research methods, we analyse two rounds of semi-structured phone interviews, conducted between June and September 2020 in the township of Khayelitsha, Cape Town. We contextualise these by presenting a snapshot of the nationwide dynamics using quantitative panel data. Our findings describe how the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic has deepened the economic vulnerability which preceded the crisis. Survivalist livelihood strategies were undermined by the economic disruption to the informal sector, while the co-variate nature of the shock rendered social networks and informal insurance mechanisms ineffective, causing households to liquidate savings, default on insurance payments, and deepen their reliance on government grants. In addition, the impact of the pandemic on schooling may deepen existing inequalities and constrain future upward mobility.

Persistent barriers to universal access to medicines are limited social protection in the event of illness, inadequate financing for essential medicines, frequent stock-outs in the public sector, and high prices in the private sector. We argue that greater coherence between human rights law, national medicines policies, and universal health coverage schemes can address these barriers. We present a cross-national content analysis of national medicines policies from 71 countries published between 1990-2016. The World Health Organization's (WHO) 2001 guidelines for developing and implementing a national medicines policy and all 71 national medicines policies were assessed on 12 principles, linking a health systems approach to essential medicines with international human rights law for medicines affordability and financing for vulnerable groups. National medicines policies most frequently contain measures for medicines selection and efficient spending/cost-effectiveness. Four principles (legal right to health; government financing; efficient spending; and financial protection of vulnerable populations) are significantly stronger in national medicines policies published after 2004 than before. Six principles have remained weak or absent: pooling user contributions, international cooperation, and four principles for good governance. Overall, South Africa (1996), Indonesia and South Sudan (2006), Philippines (2011-2016), Malaysia (2012), Somalia (2013), Afghanistan (2014), and Uganda (2015) include the most relevant texts and can be used as models for other settings. We conclude that WHO's 2001 guidelines have guided the content and language of many subsequent national medicines policies. WHO and national policy makers can use these principles and the practical examples identified in our study to further align national medicines policies with human rights law and with Target 3.8 for universal access to essential medicines in the Sustainable Development Goals.

Within the context of universal health coverage (UHC), South Africa has embarked on a series of health sector reforms. The implementation of the Ideal Clinic Realisation and Maintenance (ICRM) programme is a major UHC reform. Cooperative governance is enshrined in South Africa's Constitution, with health a concurrent competency of national and provincial government. Hence, effective inter-governmental relations (IGR) are essential for the ICRM programme implementation. The aim of the study was to measure the cohesion of IGR, specifically consultation, support and information sharing, across national, provincial and local government health departments in the ICRM programme implementation. Using Provan and Milward's theory on network effectiveness, this study was a whole network design social network analysis (SNA). The study was conducted in two districts in Gauteng (GP) and Mpumalanga (MP) provinces of South Africa. Following informed consent, we used both an interview schedule and a network matrix to collect the social network data from health policy actors in national, provincial and local government. We used UCINET version 6.619 to analyse the SNA data for the overall network cohesion and cohesion within and between the government spheres. The social network analysis revealed non-cohesive relationships between the different spheres of government. In both provinces, there was poor consultation in the ICRM programme implementation, illustrated by the low densities of seeking advice (GP = 15.6%; MP = 24.4%) and providing advice (GP = 14.1%; MP = 25.1%). The most cohesive relationships existed within the National Department of Health (density = 66.7%), suggesting that national policy actors sought advice from one another, rather than from the provincial health departments. A density of 2.1% in GP, and 12.5% in MP illustrated the latter. The non-cohesive relationships amongst policy actors across government spheres should be addressed in order to realise the benefits of cooperative governance in implementing the ICRM programme.

Within the context of universal health coverage (UHC), South Africa has embarked on a series of health sector reforms. The implementation of the Ideal Clinic Realisation and Maintenance (ICRM) programme is a major UHC reform. Cooperative governance is enshrined in South Africa's Constitution, with health a concurrent competency of national and provincial government. Hence, effective inter-governmental relations (IGR) are essential for the ICRM programme implementation. The aim of the study was to measure the cohesion of IGR, specifically consultation, support and information sharing, across national, provincial and local government health departments in the ICRM programme implementation. Using Provan and Milward's theory on network effectiveness, this study was a whole network design social network analysis (SNA). The study was conducted in two districts in Gauteng (GP) and Mpumalanga (MP) provinces of South Africa. Following informed consent, we used both an interview schedule and a network matrix to collect the social network data from health policy actors in national, provincial and local government. We used UCINET version 6.619 to analyse the SNA data for the overall network cohesion and cohesion within and between the government spheres. The social network analysis revealed non-cohesive relationships between the different spheres of government. In both provinces, there was poor consultation in the ICRM programme implementation, illustrated by the low densities of seeking advice (GP = 15.6%; MP = 24.4%) and providing advice (GP = 14.1%; MP = 25.1%). The most cohesive relationships existed within the National Department of Health (density = 66.7%), suggesting that national policy actors sought advice from one another, rather than from the provincial health departments. A density of 2.1% in GP, and 12.5% in MP illustrated the latter. The non-cohesive relationships amongst policy actors across government spheres should be addressed in order to realise the benefits of cooperative governance in implementing the ICRM programme.

Background The introduction of national health insurance (NHI), aimed at achieving universal coverage, is the most important issue currently on the South African health policy agenda. Improvement in public sector health-care provision is crucial for the successful implementation of NHI as, regardless of whether health-care services become more affordable and available, if the quality of the services provided is not acceptable, people will not use the services. Although there has been criticism of the quality of public sector health services, limited research is available to identify what communities regard as the greatest problems with the services. Methods A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was undertaken to elicit public preferences on key dimensions of quality of care when selecting public health facilities in South Africa. Qualitative methods were applied to establish attributes and levels for the DCE. To elicit preferences, interviews with community members were held in two South African provinces: 491 in Western Cape and 499 in Eastern Cape. Results The availability of necessary medicine at health facilities has the greatest impact on the probability of attending public health facilities. Other clinical quality attributes (i.e. provision of expert advice and provision of a thorough examination) are more valued than non-clinical quality of care attributes (i.e. staff attitude, treatment by doctors or nurses, and waiting time). Treatment by a doctor was less valued than all other attributes. Conclusion Communities are prepared to tolerate public sector health service characteristics such as a long waiting time, poor staff attitudes and lack of direct access to doctors if they receive the medicine they need, a thorough examination and a clear explanation of the diagnosis and prescribed treatment from health professionals. These findings prioritize issues that the South African government must address in order to meet their commitment to improve public sector health-care service provision.

For over a decade, the global health community has advanced policy engagement with migration and health, as reflected in multiple global-led initiatives. These initiatives have called on governments to provide universal health coverage to all people, regardless of their migratory and/or legal status. South Africa is a middle-income country that experiences high levels of cross-border and internal migration, with the right to health enshrined in its Constitution. A National Health Insurance Bill also commits the South African public health system to universal health coverage, including for migrant and mobile groups. We conducted a study of government policy documents (from the health sector and other sectors) that in our view should be relevant to issues of migration and health, at national and subnational levels in South Africa. We did so to explore how migration is framed by key government decision makers, and to understand whether positions present in the documents support a migrant-aware and migrant-inclusive approach, in line with South Africa’s policy commitments. This study was conducted between 2019 and 2021, and included analysis of 227 documents, from 2002–2019. Fewer than half the documents identified (101) engaged directly with migration as an issue, indicating a lack of prioritisation in the policy discourse. Across these documents, we found that the language or discourse across government levels and sectors focused mainly on the potential negative aspects of migration, including in policies that explicitly refer to health. The discourse often emphasised the prevalence of cross-border migration and diseases, the relationship between immigration and security risks, and the burden of migration on health systems and other government resources. These positions attribute blame to migrant groups, potentially fuelling nationalist and anti-migrant sentiment and largely obscuring the issue of internal mobility, all of which could also undermine the constructive engagement necessary to support effective responses to migration and health. We provide suggestions on how to advance engagement with issues of migration and health in order for South Africa and countries of a similar context in regard to migration to meet the goal of inclusion and equity for migrant and mobile groups.