Dataset Information

Comparative performance of private and public healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Private sector healthcare delivery in low- and middle-income countries is sometimes argued to be more efficient, accountable, and sustainable than public sector delivery. Conversely, the public sector is often regarded as providing more equitable and evidence-based care. We performed a systematic review of research studies investigating the performance of private and public sector delivery in low- and middle-income countries.

Methods and findings

Peer-reviewed studies including case studies, meta-analyses, reviews, and case-control analyses, as well as reports published by non-governmental organizations and international agencies, were systematically collected through large database searches, filtered through methodological inclusion criteria, and organized into six World Health Organization health system themes: accessibility and responsiveness; quality; outcomes; accountability, transparency, and regulation; fairness and equity; and efficiency. Of 1,178 potentially relevant unique citations, data were obtained from 102 articles describing studies conducted in low- and middle-income countries. Comparative cohort and cross-sectional studies suggested that providers in the private sector more frequently violated medical standards of practice and had poorer patient outcomes, but had greater reported timeliness and hospitality to patients. Reported efficiency tended to be lower in the private than in the public sector, resulting in part from perverse incentives for unnecessary testing and treatment. Public sector services experienced more limited availability of equipment, medications, and trained healthcare workers. When the definition of "private sector" included unlicensed and uncertified providers such as drug shop owners, most patients appeared to access care in the private sector; however, when unlicensed healthcare providers were excluded from the analysis, the majority of people accessed public sector care. "Competitive dynamics" for funding appeared between the two sectors, such that public funds and personnel were redirected to private sector development, followed by reductions in public sector service budgets and staff.

Conclusions

Studies evaluated in this systematic review do not support the claim that the private sector is usually more efficient, accountable, or medically effective than the public sector; however, the public sector appears frequently to lack timeliness and hospitality towards patients.

SUBMITTER: Basu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3378609 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative performance of private and public healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Basu Sanjay S Andrews Jason J Kishore Sandeep S Panjabi Rajesh R Stuckler David D

PLoS medicine 20120619 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>Private sector healthcare delivery in low- and middle-income countries is sometimes argued to be more efficient, accountable, and sustainable than public sector delivery. Conversely, the public sector is often regarded as providing more equitable and evidence-based care. We performed a systematic review of research studies investigating the performance of private and public sector delivery in low- and middle-income countries.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>Peer-reviewed studies ...[more]

PMID: 22723748

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIntimate partner violence (IPV) considerably harms the health, safety and well-being of women. In response, public health systems around the globe have been gradually implementing strategies. In particular, low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) have been developing innovative interventions in primary healthcare (PHC) addressing the problem. This paper describes a protocol for a systematic review of studies addressing the impacts and outcomes of PHC centre interventions addressing IPV against women from LMIC.Methods and analysisA systematic search for studies will be conducted in African Index Medicus, Africa Portal Digital Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, Index Medicus for the Southeast Asia Region, IndMed, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature Database (LILACS), Medecins Sans Frontieres, MEDLINE, Minority Health and Health Equity Archive, ProQuest, PsycINFO, Scientific Electronic Library Online, (SciELO) and Social Policy and Practice. Studies will be in English, Spanish and Portuguese, published between 2007 and 2017, addressing IPV against women from LMIC, whose data quantitatively report on the impacts and outcomes for survivors and/or workers and/or public health systems preintervention and postintervention. Two trilingual reviewers will independently screen for study eligibility and data extraction, and a librarian will cross-check for compliance. Risk of bias and quality assessment of studies will be measured according to: (1) the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias for randomised controlled trials and (2) the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS). Data will be analysed and summarised using meta-analysis and narrative description of the evidence across studies. This systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols(PRISMA P) guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will be based on published studies, thus not requiring ethical approval. Findings will be presented in conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42017069261.

Project description:BackgroundPrognostic models-used in critical care medicine for mortality predictions, for benchmarking and for illness stratification in clinical trials-have been validated predominantly in high-income countries. These results may not be reproducible in low or middle-income countries (LMICs), not only because of different case-mix characteristics but also because of missing predictor variables. The study objective was to systematically review literature on the use of critical care prognostic models in LMICs and assess their ability to discriminate between survivors and non-survivors at hospital discharge of those admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), their calibration, their accuracy, and the manner in which missing values were handled.MethodsThe PubMed database was searched in March 2017 to identify research articles reporting the use and performance of prognostic models in the evaluation of mortality in ICUs in LMICs. Studies carried out in ICUs in high-income countries or paediatric ICUs and studies that evaluated disease-specific scoring systems, were limited to a specific disease or single prognostic factor, were published only as abstracts, editorials, letters and systematic and narrative reviews or were not in English were excluded.ResultsOf the 2233 studies retrieved, 473 were searched and 50 articles reporting 119 models were included. Five articles described the development and evaluation of new models, whereas 114 articles externally validated Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score and Mortality Probability Models or versions thereof. Missing values were only described in 34% of studies; exclusion and or imputation by normal values were used. Discrimination, calibration and accuracy were reported in 94.0%, 72.4% and 25% respectively. Good discrimination and calibration were reported in 88.9% and 58.3% respectively. However, only 10 evaluations that reported excellent discrimination also reported good calibration. Generalisability of the findings was limited by variability of inclusion and exclusion criteria, unavailability of post-ICU outcomes and missing value handling.ConclusionsRobust interpretations regarding the applicability of prognostic models are currently hampered by poor adherence to reporting guidelines, especially when reporting missing value handling. Performance of mortality risk prediction models in LMIC ICUs is at best moderate, especially with limitations in calibration. This necessitates continued efforts to develop and validate LMIC models with readily available prognostic variables, perhaps aided by medical registries.

Project description:Introduction:The 2018 Astana Declaration reaffirmed global commitment to primary healthcare (PHC) as a core strategy to achieve universal health coverage. To meet this potential, PHC in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) needs to be strengthened, but research is lacking and fragmented. We conducted a scoping review of the recent literature to assess the state of research on PHC in LMIC and understand where future research is most needed. Methods:Guided by the Primary Healthcare Performance Initiative (PHCPI) conceptual framework, we conducted searches of the peer-reviewed literature on PHC in LMIC published between 2010 (the publication year of the last major review of PHC in LMIC) and 2017. We also conducted country-specific searches to understand performance trajectories in 14 high-performing countries identified in the previous review. Evidence highlights and gaps for each topic area of the PHCPI framework were extracted and summarised. Results:We retrieved 5219 articles, 207 of which met final inclusion criteria. Many PHC system inputs such as payment and workforce are well-studied. A number of emerging service delivery innovations have early evidence of success but lack evidence for how to scale more broadly. Community-based PHC systems with supportive governmental policies and financing structures (public and private) consistently promote better outcomes and equity. Among the 14 highlighted countries, most maintained or improved progress in the scope of services, quality, access and financial coverage of PHC during the review time period. Conclusion:Our findings revealed a heterogeneous focus of recent literature, with ample evidence for effective PHC policies, payment and other system inputs. More variability was seen in key areas of service delivery, underscoring a need for greater emphasis on implementation science and intervention testing. Future evaluations are needed on PHC system capacities and orientation toward social accountability, innovation, management and population health in order to achieve the promise of PHC.

Project description:BackgroundStunting during childhood has long-term consequences on human capital, including decreased physical growth, and lower educational attainment, cognition, workforce productivity and wages. Previous research has quantified the costs of stunting to national economies however beyond a few single-country datasets there has been a limited number of which have used diverse datasets and have had a dedicated focus on the private sector, which employs nearly 90% of the workforce in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to examine (i) the impact of childhood stunting on income loss of private sector workforce in LMICs; (ii) to quantify losses in sales to private firms in LMICs due to childhood stunting; and (iii) to estimate potential gains (benefit-cost ratios) if stunting levels are reduced in select high prevalence countries.MethodsThis multiple-methods study engaged multi-disciplinary technical advisers, executed several literature reviews, used innovative statistical methods, and implemented health and labor economic models. We analyzed data from seven longitudinal datasets (up to 30+ years of follow-up; 1982-2016; Peru, Ethiopia, India, Vietnam, Philippines, Tanzania, Brazil), 108 private firm datasets (spanning 2008-2020), and many global datasets including Joint Malnutrition Estimates, and World Development Indicators to produce estimates for 120+ LMICs (with estimates up to 2021). We studied the impact of childhood stunting on adult cognition, education, and height as pathways to wages/productivity in adulthood. We employed cloud-based artificial intelligence (AI) platforms, and conducted comparative analyses using three analytic approaches: traditional frequentist statistics, Bayesian inferential statistics and machine learning. We employed labour and health economic models to estimate wage losses to the private sector worker and firm revenue losses due to stunting. We also estimated benefit-cost ratios for countries investing in nutrition-specific interventions to prevent stunting.FindingsAcross 95 LMICs, childhood stunting costs the private sector at least US$135.4 billion in sales annually. Firms from countries in Latin America and the Caribbean and East Asia and Pacific regions had the greatest losses. Totals sales losses to the private sector accumulated to 0.01% to 1.2% of national GDP across countries. Sectors most affected by childhood stunting were manufacturing (non-metallic mineral, fabricated metal, other), garments and food sectors. Sale losses were highest for larger sized private firms. Across regions (representing 123 LMICs), US$700 million (Middle East and North Africa) to US$16.5 billion (East Asia and Pacific) monthly income was lost among private sector workers. Investing in stunting reduction interventions yields gains from US$2 to US$81 per $1 invested annually (or 100% to 8000% across countries). Across sectors, the highest returns were in elementary occupations (US$46) and the lowest were among agricultural workers (US$8). By gender, women incurred a higher income penalty from childhood stunting and earned less than men; due to their relatively higher earnings, the returns for investing in stunting reduction were consistently higher for men across most countries studied.InterpretationChildhood stunting costs the private sector in LMICs billions of dollars in sales and earnings for the workforce annually. Returns to nutrition interventions show that there is an economic case to be made for investing in childhood nutrition, alongside a moral one for both the public and private sector. This research could be used to motivate strong public-private sector partnerships to invest in childhood undernutrition for benefits in the short and long-term.

Project description:IntroductionPrivate sector provision of HIV treatment is increasing in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC). However, there is limited documentation of its outcomes. This protocol reports a proposed systematic review that will synthesise clinical outcomes of private sector HIV treatment in LMIC.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses protocols. Primary outcomes will include: (1) proportion of eligible patients initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART); (2) proportion of those on ART with <1000 copies/mL; (3) rate of all-cause mortality among ART recipients. Secondary outcomes will include: (1) proportion receiving Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia prophylaxis; (2) proportion with >90% ART adherence (based on any measure reported); (3) proportion screened for non-communicable diseases (specifically cervical cancer, diabetes, hypertension and mental ill health); (iv) proportion screened for tuberculosis. A search of five electronic bibliographical databases (Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, Web of Science and CINAHL) and reference lists of included articles will be conducted to identify relevant articles reporting HIV clinical outcomes. Searches will be limited to LMIC. No age, publication date, study-design or language limits will be applied. Authors of relevant studies will be contacted for clarification. Two reviewers will independently screen citations and abstracts, identify full text articles for inclusion, extract data and appraise the quality and bias of included studies. Outcome data will be pooled to generate aggregative proportions of primary and secondary outcomes. Descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis will be presented. Heterogeneity and sensitivity assessments will be conducted to aid interpretation of results.Ethics and disseminationThe results of this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed scientific manuscript and at international scientific conferences. Results will inform quality improvement strategies, replication of identified good practices, potential policy changes, and future research.Prospero registration numberCRD42016040053.

Project description:BackgroundHow to finance progress towards universal health coverage in low-income and middle-income countries is a subject of intense debate. We investigated how alternative tax systems affect the breadth, depth, and height of health system coverage.MethodsWe used cross-national longitudinal fixed effects models to assess the relationships between total and different types of tax revenue, health system coverage, and associated child and maternal health outcomes in 89 low-income and middle-income countries from 1995-2011.FindingsTax revenue was a major statistical determinant of progress towards universal health coverage. Each US$100 per capita per year of additional tax revenues corresponded to a yearly increase in government health spending of $9.86 (95% CI 3.92-15.8), adjusted for GDP per capita. This association was strong for taxes on capital gains, profits, and income ($16.7, 9.16 to 24.3), but not for consumption taxes on goods and services (-$4.37, -12.9 to 4.11). In countries with low tax revenues (<$1000 per capita per year), an additional $100 tax revenue per year substantially increased the proportion of births with a skilled attendant present by 6.74 percentage points (95% CI 0.87-12.6) and the extent of financial coverage by 11.4 percentage points (5.51-17.2). Consumption taxes, a more regressive form of taxation that might reduce the ability of the poor to afford essential goods, were associated with increased rates of post-neonatal mortality, infant mortality, and under-5 mortality rates. We did not detect these adverse associations with taxes on capital gains, profits, and income, which tend to be more progressive.InterpretationIncreasing domestic tax revenues is integral to achieving universal health coverage, particularly in countries with low tax bases. Pro-poor taxes on profits and capital gains seem to support expanding health coverage without the adverse associations with health outcomes observed for higher consumption taxes. Progressive tax policies within a pro-poor framework might accelerate progress toward achieving major international health goals.FundingCommission of the European Communities (FP7-DEMETRIQ), the European Union's HRES grants, and the Wellcome Trust.

Dataset Information

Comparative performance of private and public healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Introduction

Methods and findings

Conclusions

Publications

Comparative performance of private and public healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets