A Qualitative Assessment of the Essential Health and Nutrition Service Delivery in the Context of COVID-19 in Bangladesh: The Perspective of Divisional Directors.

Bangladesh suffered disruptions in the utilization of essential health and nutrition services (EHNS) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The magnitude of the pandemic has been documented, but little is known from the perspectives of health administrators. A rapid qualitative assessment of division-level capacity identified successes and bottlenecks in providing EHNS- and COVID-19-related services during the first months of the pandemic in Bangladesh. Semi-structured interviews were held with the Health and Family Planning Divisional Directors of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. The Primary Health Care System Framework guided the content analysis, focusing on (i) service delivery, (ii) communication and community outreach, and (iii) surveillance and service monitoring. Our findings identified low care seeking due to fears of getting infected and unawareness that EHNS were still available. Adaptations to telemedicine were highly heterogeneous between divisions, but collaboration with NGOs were fruitful in reinstating outreach activities. Guidelines were centered on COVID-19 information and less so on EHNS. The inflexibility of spending capacities at divisional and clinic levels hindered service provision. Misinformation and information voids were difficult to handle all around the country. Community health workers were useful for outreach communication. EHNS must be guaranteed during sanitary emergencies, and Bangladesh presented with both significant efforts and areas of opportunity for improvement.

Household costs of healthcare during pregnancy, delivery, and the postpartum period: a case study from Matlab, Bangladesh.

A household survey was undertaken in Matlab, a rural area of Bangladesh, to estimate the costs incurred during pregnancy, delivery, and the postpartum period for women delivering at home and in a health facility. Those interviewed included 121 women who delivered at home, 120 who delivered in an ICDDR,B basic obstetric care (BEOC) facility, 27 who delivered in a public comprehensive obstetric care (CEOC) hospital, and 58 who delivered in private hospitals. There was no significant difference in total costs incurred by those delivering at home and those delivering in a BEOC facility. Costs for those delivering in CEOC facilities were over nine times greater than for those delivering in BEOC facilities. Costs of care during delivery were predominant. Antenatal and postnatal care added between 7% and 30% to the total cost. Services were more equitable at home and in a BEOC facility compared to services provided at CEOC facilities. The study highlights the regressive nature of the financing of CEOC services and the need for a financing strategy that covers both the costs of referral and BEOC care for those in need.