Measurement of unmet healthcare needs to assess progress on universal health coverage - exploring a novel approach based on household surveys.

BACKGROUND: Universal Health Coverage (UHC) aims to ensure universal access to quality healthcare according to health needs. The extent to which population health needs are met should be a key measure for progress on UHC. The indicators in use for measuring access mostly relate to physical accessibility or insurance coverage. Or, utilization of services is taken as indirect measure for access but it is assessed against only the perceived healthcare needs. The unperceived needs do not get taken into account. The present study was aimed at demonstrating an approach for measuring the unmet healthcare needs using household survey data as an additional measure of UHC. METHODS: A household survey was conducted in Chhattisgarh state of India, covering a multi-stage sample of 3153 individuals. Healthcare need was measured in terms of perceived needs which would be self-reported and unperceived needs where clinical measurement supplemented the interview response. Estimation of unperceived healthcare needs was limited to three tracer conditions- hypertension, diabetes and depression. Multivariate analysis was conducted to find the determinants of the various measures of the perceived and unperceived needs. RESULTS: Of the surveyed individuals, 10.47% reported perceived healthcare needs for acute ailments in the last 15 days. 10.62% individuals self-reported suffering from chronic conditions. 12.75% of those with acute ailment and 18.40% with chronic ailments received no treatment, while 27.83% and 9.07% respectively received treatment from unqualified providers. On an average, patients with chronic ailments received only half the medication doses required annually. The latent need was very high for chronic ailments. 47.42% of individuals above 30 years age never had blood pressure measured. 95% of those identified with likelihood of depression had not sought any healthcare and they did not know they could be suffering from depression. CONCLUSION: To assess progress on UHC more meaningfully, better methods are needed to measure unmet healthcare needs, taking into account both the perceived and unperceived needs, as well as incomplete care and inappropriate care. Appropriately designed household surveys offer a significant potential to allow its periodic measurement. Their limitations in measuring the 'inappropriate care' may necessitate supplementation with qualitative methods.

Health sector reform at the COVID cross-roads: Public goods or health markets - An agenda for health systems research.

The debate around approaches to health sector reform is one of the foundational questions around which the discipline of health policy and systems research has grown. In the immediate postwar period, health and health care were recognized as areas of market failure, requiring state action in the provision of free or subsidized services. In the eighties and nineties, due to both geopolitical and ideological reasons, this understanding changed, leading to a wave of market-based health sector reforms. An academic discourse built around neoliberal economics initiated, shaped, and legitimized these reforms. Faced with worsening health outcomes and costs of care after a decade of such reforms, there was a partial reversal of policy toward improving health sector performance that relied on nonmarket solutions built around notions of solidarity, trust, and rights. In India, this took the form of the National Rural Health Mission. Examples of health systems research that supported this direction of change are discussed. In the last decade, a second wave of health sector reforms sought to make markets work by repositioning government as purchaser of health care from private providers through insurance and contracts. There is little evidence that this worked. The need to rely on public services to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, further questioned this direction of reform. We emphasize the need to expand and develop a framework of health systems and policy studies that are more appropriate to the achievement of universal health care, health equity, and health rights in the Indian context.

Progress towards universal health coverage in the context of rheumatic diseases in India.

AIM: This study aims to measure current situation with regard to access and financial protection towards healthcare for rheumatic diseases (RDs) in India. METHOD: The first part of this study is quantitative, and uses the data generated by the 71st Round of National Sample Survey 2014, which measured self-reported morbidity, choice of provider and utilization of services and out of pocket expenditure (OOPE) incurred on healthcare services in a sample of 65 932 households and 333 104 individuals from all across India. The second qualitative part of the study was done in one sample district to understand the barriers to access and financial protection. RESULTS: 3.5% of all hospitalizations in the preceding one year and 9.9% of all ambulatory care in the preceding 15 days of this study period were due to RDs. Cost of care for RDs was three times higher in private sector. Cost on medicines comprised the largest share in both sectors. 54% of the households faced catastrophic health expenditure at 10% threshold (CHE-10) and this was nine times higher in private provisioning (OR: 8.8, CI: 6.8-11.4). 24% of the households had to borrow or sell household assets to meet the hospitalization expenditure. Insurance had marginal impact and it did not help in preventing household from facing CHE-10 for the lowermost three economic quintiles. There was significant unmet health care needs and lack of continuity of care of RDs in India. CONCLUSION: Addressing the gaps in access and financial protection for patients with RDs need greater emphasis in policy as well as implementation, if the country has to achieve Universal Health Coverage.

Punching above their weight: a network to understand broader determinants of increasing life expectancy.

BACKGROUND: Life expectancy initially improves rapidly with economic development but then tails off. Yet, at any level of economic development, some countries do better, and some worse, than expected - they either punch above or below their weight. Why this is the case has been previously researched but no full explanation of the complexity of this phenomenon is available. NEW RESEARCH NETWORK: In order to advance understanding, the newly formed Punching Above Their Weight Research Network has developed a model to frame future research. It provides for consideration of the following influences within a country: political and institutional context and history; economic and social policies; scope for democratic participation; extent of health promoting policies affecting socio-economic inequities; gender roles and power dynamics; the extent of civil society activity and disease burdens. CONCLUSION: Further research using this framework has considerable potential to advance effective policies to advance health and equity.

Community health workers and accountability: reflections from an international "think-in".

Community health workers (CHWs) are frequently put forward as a remedy for lack of health system capacity, including challenges associated with health service coverage and with low community engagement in the health system, and expected to enhance or embody health system accountability. During a 'think in', held in June of 2017, a diverse group of practitioners and researchers discussed the topic of CHWs and their possible roles in a larger "accountability ecosystem." This jointly authored commentary resulted from our deliberations. While CHWs are often conceptualized as cogs in a mechanistic health delivery system, at the end of the day, CHWs are people embedded in families, communities, and the health system. CHWs' social position and professional role influence how they are treated and trusted by the health sector and by community members, as well as when, where, and how they can exercise agency and promote accountability. To that end, we put forward several propositions for further conceptual development and research related to the question of CHWs and accountability.

Effectiveness of government strategies for financial protection against costs of hospitalization Care in India.

BACKGROUND: In the past decade, India has seen the introduction of many 'publicly funded health insurance' schemes (PFHIs) that claim to cover approximately 300 million people and are essentially forms of purchasing care from both public and private providers to reduce out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) for hospitalization. METHODS: Data from a recent government-organized nationwide household survey, The National Sample Survey 71st Round, were used to analyse the effectiveness and equity of tax-funded public health services and PFHIs as distinct but overlapping approaches to financial protection for hospitalization across different socio-economic categories. Cross-tabulation analysis, multivariate logistic regression and propensity score matching were the main analytical methods used. RESULTS: Government hospitals provide access to 45.6% of all hospitalization needs. Although poorer quintiles use public hospitals more often, even in the poorest quintile, as many as 37.2% are utilizing private hospitals. The average OOPE that a household experiences for hospitalization in public hospitals is approximately only one-fifth of the OOPE for hospitalization in the private sector. PFHI schemes cover 12.8% of the population, and coverage is higher in upper quintiles and in urban areas. Hospitalization rates increase with PFHI coverage, and this occurs with both public and private providers. Propensity score matching shows that PFHI contributes to a marginal reduction (1%) in 'catastrophic health expenditure incidence at the 25% threshold' (CHE-25) for the bottom three quintiles. The reported coverage of PFHIs was greater in the upper income quintiles. Utilization of public services was greater in the poorer income quintiles and more marginalized social groups. CONCLUSIONS: Periodic surveys are essential to guide policy choices regarding the appropriate mix of strategies for financial protection in pluralistic systems. There is a need for caution regarding any shift in the role of governments from providing services to purchasing care, given the contexts and limitations of currently available PFHIs. Even with tax-funded public services, although the average OOPE is lower than the care purchased through PFHIs, there is still a modest level of CHE and impoverishment due to health care costs that persist. Both strategies need to be synergized for more effective financial protection.