Dataset Information

Policy levers and priority-setting in universal health coverage: a qualitative analysis of healthcare financing agenda setting in Kenya.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Competing priorities in health systems necessitate difficult choices on which health actions and investments to fund: decisions that are complex, value-based, and highly political. In light of the centrality of universal health coverage (UHC) in driving current health policy, we sought to examine the value interests that influence agenda setting in the country's health financing space. Given the plurality of Kenya's health policy levers, we aimed to examine how the perspectives of stakeholders involved in policy decision-making and implementation shape discussions on health financing within the UHC framework. METHODS:A series of in-depth key informant interviews were conducted at national and county level (n?=?13) between April and May 2018. Final thematic analysis using the Framework Method was conducted to identify similarities and differences amongst stakeholders on the challenges hindering Kenya's achievement of UHC in terms of its the optimisation of health service coverage; expansion of the population that benefits from essential healthcare services; and the minimisation of out-of-pocket costs associated with health-seeking behaviour. RESULTS:Our findings indicate that the perceived lack of strategic leadership from Kenya's national government has led to a lack of agreement on stakeholders' interpretation of what is to be understood by UHC, its contextual values and priorities. We observe material differences between and within policy networks on the country's priorities for population coverage, healthcare service provision, and cost-sharing under the UHC dispensation. In spite of this, we note that progressive universalism is considered as the preferred approach towards UHC in Kenya, with most interviewees prioritising an equity-based approach that prioritises better access to healthcare services and financial risk protection. However, the conflicting priorities of key stakeholders risk derailing progress towards the expansion of access to health services and financial risk protection. CONCLUSIONS:This study adds to existing knowledge of UHC in Kenya by contextualising the competing and evolving priorities that should be taken into consideration as the country strategises over its UHC process. We suggest that clear policy action is required from national government and county governments in order to develop a logical and consistent approach towards UHC in Kenya.

SUBMITTER: Oraro-Lawrence T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7059333 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Policy levers and priority-setting in universal health coverage: a qualitative analysis of healthcare financing agenda setting in Kenya.

Oraro-Lawrence Tessa T Wyss Kaspar K

BMC health services research 20200306 1

<h4>Background</h4>Competing priorities in health systems necessitate difficult choices on which health actions and investments to fund: decisions that are complex, value-based, and highly political. In light of the centrality of universal health coverage (UHC) in driving current health policy, we sought to examine the value interests that influence agenda setting in the country's health financing space. Given the plurality of Kenya's health policy levers, we aimed to examine how the perspective ...[more]

PMID: 32143629

Similar Datasets

Project description:Universal health coverage (UHC) is important in terms of improving access to quality health care while protecting households from the risk of catastrophic health spending and impoverishment. However, progress to UHC has been hampered by the measures to increase mandatory prepaid funds especially in low- and middle-income countries where there are large populations in the informal sector. Important considerations in expanding coverage to the informal sector should include an exploration of the type of prepayment system that is acceptable to the informal sector and the features of such a design that would encourage prepayment for health care among this population group. The objective of the study was to document the views of informal sector workers regarding different prepayment mechanisms, and critically analyze key design features of a future health system and the policy implications of financing UHC in Kenya.This was part of larger study which involved a mixed-methods approach. The following tools were used to collect data from informal sector workers: focus group discussions [N = 16 (rural = 7; urban = 9)], individual in-depth interviews [N = 26 (rural = 14; urban = 12)] and a questionnaire survey [N = 455(rural = 129; urban = 326)]. Thematic approach was used to analyze qualitative data while Stata v.11 involving mainly descriptive analysis was used in quantitative data. The tools mentioned were used to collect data to meet various objectives of a larger study and what is presented here constitutes a small section of the data generated by these tools.The findings show that informal sector workers in rural and urban areas prefer different prepayment systems for financing UHC. Preference for a non-contributory system of financing UHC was particularly strong in the urban study site (58%). Over 70% in the rural area preferred a contributory mechanism in financing UHC. The main concern for informal sector workers regardless of the overall design of the financing approach to UHC included a poor governance culture especially one that does not punish corruption. Other reasons especially with regard to the contributory financing approach included high premium costs and inability to enforce contributions from informal sector.On average 47% of all study participants, the largest single majority, are in favor of a non-contributory financing mechanism. Strong evidence from existing literature indicates difficulties in implementing social contributions as the primary financing mechanism for UHC in contexts with large informal sector populations. Non-contributory financing should be strongly recommended to policymakers to be the primary financing mechanism and supplemented by social contributions.

Project description:BackgroundHigh burden of healthcare expenditure precludes the poor from access to quality healthcare services. In Ethiopia, a significant proportion of the population has faced financial catastrophe associated with the costs of healthcare services. The Ethiopian Government aims to achieve universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030; however, the Ethiopian health system is struggling with low healthcare funding and high out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure despite the implementation of several reforms in health care financing (HCF). This review aims to map the contributions, successes and challenges of HCF initiatives in Ethiopia.MethodsWe searched literature in three databases: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of science. Search terms were identified in broader three themes: health care financing, UHC and Ethiopia. We synthesised the findings using the health care financing framework: revenue generation, risk pooling and strategic purchasing.ResultsA total of 52 articles were included in the final review. Generating an additional income for health facilities, promoting cost-sharing, risk-sharing/ social solidarity for the non-predicted illness, providing special assistance mechanisms for those who cannot afford to pay, and purchasing healthcare services were the successes of Ethiopia's health financing. Ethiopia's HCF initiatives have significant contributions to healthcare infrastructures, medical supplies, diagnostic capacity, drugs, financial-risk protection, and healthcare services. However, poor access to equitable quality healthcare services was associated with low healthcare funding and high OOP payments.ConclusionEthiopia's health financing initiatives have various successes and contributions to revenue generation, risk pooling, and purchasing healthcare services towards UHC. Standardisation of benefit packages, ensuring beneficiaries equal access to care and introducing an accreditation system to maintain quality of care help to manage service disparities. A unified health insurance system that providing the same benefit packages for all, is the most efficient way to attain equitable access to health care.

Project description:BackgroundHealth Research Priority Setting (HRPS) in the Ministry of Health (MOH) Malaysia was initiated more than a decade ago to drive effort toward research for informed decision and policy-making. This study assessed the impact of funded prioritised research and identified research gaps to inform future priority setting initiatives for universal access and quality healthcare in Malaysia.MethodsResearch impact of universal access and quality healthcare projects funded by the National Institutes of Health Malaysia were assessed based on the modified Payback Framework, addressing categories of informing policy, knowledge production, and benefits to health and health sector. For the HRPS process, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology was adapted and adopted, with the incorporation of stakeholder values using weights and monetary allocation survey. Workshop discussions and interviews with stakeholders and research groups were conducted to identify research gaps, with the use of conceptual frameworks to guide the search.ResultsSeventeen ongoing and 50 completed projects were identified for research funding impact analysis. Overall, research fund allocation differed from stakeholders' expectation. For research impact, 48 out of 50 completed projects (96.0%) contributed to some form of policy-making efforts. Almost all completed projects resulted in outputs that contributed to knowledge production and were expected to lead to health and health sector benefits. The HRPS process led to the identification of research priority areas that stemmed from ongoing and new issues identified for universal access and quality healthcare.ConclusionThe concerted efforts of evaluation of research funding impact, prioritisation, dissemination and policy-maker involvement were valuable for optimal health research resource utilisation in a resource constrained developing country. Embedding impact evaluation into a priority setting process and funding research based on national needs could facilitate health research investment to reach its potential.

Project description:BackgroundCountries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have substantially improved access to family planning over the past 50 years. Many have also recently adopted explicit declarations of universal rights to health and universal health coverage (UHC) and have begun implementing UHC-oriented health financing schemes. These schemes will have important implications for the sustainability and further growth of family planning programs throughout the region.MethodsWe examined the status of contraceptive methods in major health delivery and financing schemes in 9 LAC countries. Using a set of 37 indicators on family planning coverage, family planning financing, health financing, and family planning inclusion in UHC-oriented schemes, we conducted a desk review of secondary sources, including population surveys, health financing assessments, insurance enrollment reports, and unit cost estimates, and interviewed in-country experts.Findings: Although the modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR) has continued to increase in the majority of LAC countries, substantial disparities in access for marginalized groups remain. On average, mCPR is 20% lower among indigenous women than the general population, 5% lower among uninsured women than insured, and 7% lower among the poorest women than the wealthiest. Among the poorest quintile of women, insured women had an mCPR 16.5 percentage points higher than that of uninsured women, suggesting that expansion of insurance coverage is associated with increased family planning access and use. In the high- and upper-middle-income countries we reviewed, all modern contraceptive methods are typically available through the social health insurance schemes that cover a majority of the population. However, in low- and lower-middle-income countries, despite free provision of most family planning services in public health facilities, stock-outs and implicit rationing present substantial barriers that prevent clients from accessing their preferred method or force them to pay out of pocket.ConclusionLeveraging UHC-oriented schemes to sustain and further increase family planning progress will require that governments take deliberate steps to (1) target poor and informal sector populations, (2) include family planning in benefits packages, (3) ensure sufficient financing for family planning, and (4) reduce nonfinancial barriers to access. Through these steps, countries can increase financial protection for family planning and better ensure the right to health of poor and marginalized populations.

Dataset Information

Policy levers and priority-setting in universal health coverage: a qualitative analysis of healthcare financing agenda setting in Kenya.

Publications

Policy levers and priority-setting in universal health coverage: a qualitative analysis of healthcare financing agenda setting in Kenya.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets