Dataset Information

Implementing performance-based financing in peripheral health centres in Mali: what can we learn from it?

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Numerous sub-Saharan African countries have experimented with performance-based financing (PBF) with the goal of improving health system performance. To date, few articles have examined the implementation of this type of complex intervention in Francophone West Africa. This qualitative research aims to understand the process of implementing a PBF pilot project in Mali's Koulikoro region. METHOD:We conducted a contrasted multiple case study of performance in 12 community health centres in three districts. We collected 161 semi-structured interviews, 69 informal interviews and 96 non-participant observation sessions. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research adapted to the research topic and local context. RESULTS:Our analysis revealed that the internal context of the PBF implementation played a key role in the process. High-performing centres exercised leadership and commitment more strongly than low-performing ones. These two characteristics were associated with taking initiatives to promote PBF implementation and strengthening team spirit. Information regarding the intervention was best appropriated by qualified health professionals. However, the limited duration of the implementation did not allow for the emergence of networks or champions. The enthusiasm initially generated by PBF quickly dissipated, mainly due to delays in the implementation schedule and the payment modalities. CONCLUSION:PBF is a complex intervention in which many actors intervene in diverse contexts. The initial level of performance and the internal and external contexts of primary healthcare facilities influence the implementation of PBF. Future work in this area would benefit from an interdisciplinary approach combining public health and anthropology to better understand such an intervention. The deductive-inductive approach must be the stepping-stone of such a methodological approach.

SUBMITTER: Coulibaly A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7268714 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementing performance-based financing in peripheral health centres in Mali: what can we learn from it?

Coulibaly Abdourahmane A Gautier Lara L Zitti Tony T Ridde Valéry V

Health research policy and systems 20200603 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>Numerous sub-Saharan African countries have experimented with performance-based financing (PBF) with the goal of improving health system performance. To date, few articles have examined the implementation of this type of complex intervention in Francophone West Africa. This qualitative research aims to understand the process of implementing a PBF pilot project in Mali's Koulikoro region.<h4>Method</h4>We conducted a contrasted multiple case study of performance in 12 communi ...[more]

PMID: 32493360

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:To improve the performance of the healthcare system, Mali's government implemented a pilot project of performance-based financing (PBF) in the field of reproductive health. It was established in the Koulikoro region. This research analyses the process of implementing PBF at district hospital (DH) level, something which has rarely been done in Africa. METHODS:This qualitative research is based on a multiple, explanatory, and contrasting case study with nested levels of analysis. It covered three of the 10 DHs in the Koulikoro region. We conducted 36 interviews: 12 per DH with council of circle's members (2) and health personnel (10). We also conducted 24 non-participant observation sessions, 16 informal interviews, and performed a literature review. We performed data analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS:Stakeholders perceived the PBF pilot project as a vertical intervention from outside that focused solely on reproductive health. Local actors were not involved in the design of the PBF model. Several difficulties regarding the quality of its design and implementation were highlighted: too short duration of the intervention (8 months), choice and insufficient number of indicators according to the priority of the donors, and impossibility of making changes to the model during its implementation. All health workers adhered to the principles of PBF intervention. Except for members of the district health management team (DHMT) involved in the implementation, respondents only had partial knowledge of the PBF intervention. The implementation of PBF appeared to be easier in District 3 Hospital compared to District 1 and District 2 because it benefited from a pre-pilot project and had good leadership. CONCLUSION:The PBF programme offered an opportunity to improve the quality of care provided to the population through the motivation of health personnel in Mali. However, several obstacles were observed during the implementation of the PBF pilot project in DHs. When designing and implementing PBF in DHs, it is necessary to consider factors that can influence the implementation of a complex intervention.

Project description:BackgroundHealth systems' weakness remains one of the primary obstacles towards achieving universal access to quality healthcare in low-income settings. Performance-based financing (PBF) programs have been increasingly used to increase access to quality care in LMICs. However, evidence on the impacts of these programs remains fragmented and inconclusive. We analyze the health system impacts of the PBF program in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), one of the largest such programs introduced in LMICs to date.MethodsWe used a health systems perspective to analyze the benefits of PBF relative to unconditional financing of health facilities. Fifty-eight health zones in six provinces were randomly assigned to either a control group (28 zones) in which facilities received unconditional transfers or to a PBF program (30 zones) that started at the end of 2016. Follow-up data collection took place in 2021-2022 and included health facility assessments, health worker interviews, direct observations of consultations and deliveries, patient exit interviews, and household surveys. Using multivariate regression models, we estimated the impact of the program on 55 outcomes in seven health system domains: structural quality, technical process quality, non-technical process quality, service fees, facility management, providers' satisfaction, and service coverage. We used random-effects meta-analysis to generate pooled average estimates within each domain.ResultsThe PBF program improved the structural quality of health facilities by 4 percentage points (ppts) (95% CI 0.01-0.08), technical process quality by 5 ppts (0.03-0.07), and non-technical process by 2 ppts (0-0.04). PBF also increased coverage of priority health services by 3 ppts (0.02-0.04). Improvements were also observed for facility management (9 ppts, 0.04-0.15), service fee policies, and users' satisfaction with service affordability (14 ppts, 0.07-0.20). Service fees and health workers' satisfaction were not affected by the program.ConclusionsThe results suggest that well-designed PBF programs can lead to improvements in most health systems domains relative to comparable unconditional financing. However, the large persisting gaps suggest that additional changes, such as allocating more resources to the health system and reforming the human resources for health management, will be necessary in DRC to achieve the ambitious global universal health coverage and mortality goals.Trial registrationAmerican Economics Association Trial registry AEARCTR-0002880.

Project description:BackgroundIn Mali, community health workers (CHWs) deliver essential community care (ECC) to rural populations. The dominance of external funding for the program threatens the sustainability of this critical workforce as donor financing decreases. This article summarizes results of analyses aimed at assisting Mali's decision makers and leaders in initiating a transition to a sustainable CHW program supported by domestic funding through strategic and rational investment.MethodsData on ECC implementation norms, workforce, coverage, utilization, cost, and geospatial features were collected between 2016 and 2019. The data informed interlinked CHW financing analyses-situational, services costing, efficiency, and geospatial mapping. Analysis showed distribution of reported expenditures, estimates of required CHW funding, cost-saving options, and spatially visualized discrepancies between spending estimates and normative costs.ResultsThirteen financing sources contributed to CHW program expenditures, 88% of which were from international donors, for a package of 23 curative, preventive, and promotive interventions. In 2015, the CHW program spent US$13.01 million; an estimated US$8.36 million would have been needed to achieve the same service volume under standard care protocols. Medicines and start-up training had US$6.88 million more than needed; supervision, program management, and recurrent training components were underfunded by US$2.2 million. Cost-saving opportunities of US$6.16 million were identified in 41 of 44 districts. Funding reallocation opportunities (after meeting technical efficiency requirements) were identified in 20 of 44 districts (US$2.56 million). Use of geospatial targeting and mapping suggests district- and village-level reallocation options for theoretical funding surpluses.ConclusionCHW costs can be significantly reduced without sacrificing service technical quality. Spending can be geographically targeted to optimize service use by rural populations. Efficiency analyses provide evidence to build stronger engagement, support improved decision making, efficiently prioritize resources, and target investments for sustainable financing of CHW programs.

Project description:BackgroundPerformance based financing (PBF) has been increasingly implemented across low and middle-income countries, including in fragile and humanitarian settings, which present specific features likely to require adaptation and to influence implementation of any health financing programme. However, the literature has been surprisingly thin in the discussion of how PBF has been adapted to different contexts, and in turn how different contexts may influence PBF. With case studies from three humanitarian settings (northern Nigeria, Central African Republic and South Kivu in the Democratic Republic of Congo), we examine why and how PBF has emerged and has been adapted to those unsettled and dynamic contexts, what the opportunities and challenges have been, and what lessons can be drawn.MethodsOur comparative case study is based on data collected from a document review, 35 key informant interviews and 16 focus group discussions with stakeholders at national and subnational level in the three settings. Data were analysed in order to describe and compare each setting in terms of underlying fragility features and their implications for the health system, and to look at how PBF has been adopted, implemented and iteratively adapted to respond to acute crisis, deal with other humanitarian actors and involve local communities.ResultsOur analysis reveals that the challenging environments required a high degree of PBF adaptation and innovation, at times contravening the so-called 'PBF principles' that have become codified. We develop an analytical framework to highlight the key nodes where adaptations happen, the contextual drivers of adaptation, and the organisational elements that facilitate adaptation and may sustain PBF programmes.ConclusionsOur study points to the importance of pragmatic adaptation in PBF design and implementation to reflect the contextual specificities, and identifies elements (such as, organisational flexibility, local staff and knowledge, and embedded long-term partners) that could facilitate adaptations and innovations. These findings and framework are useful to spark a reflection among PBF donors and implementers on the relevance of incorporating, reinforcing and building on those elements when designing and implementing PBF programmes.

Project description:BackgroundHealth system financing presents a challenge in many developing countries. We assessed two reform packages, performance-based financing (PBF) and direct facility financing (DFF), against each other and business-as-usual for maternal and child healthcare (MCH) provision in Nigeria.MethodsWe sampled 571 facilities (269 in PBF; 302 in DFF) in 52 districts randomly assigned to PBF or DFF, and 215 facilities in 25 observable-matched control districts. PBF facilities received $2 ($1 for operating grants plus $1 for bonuses) for every $1 received by DFF facilities (operating grants alone). Both received autonomy, supervision, and enhanced community engagement, isolating the impact of additional performance-linked facility and health worker payments. Facilities and households with recent pregnancies in facility catchments were surveyed at baseline (2014) and endline (2017). Outcomes were Penta3 immunization, institutional deliveries, modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR), four-plus antenatal care (ANC) visits, insecticide-treated mosquito net (ITN) use by under-fives, and directly observed quality of care (QOC). We estimated difference-in-differences with state fixed effects and clustered standard errors.ResultsPBF increased institutional deliveries by 10% points over DFF and 7% over business-as-usual (p<0.01). PBF and DFF were more effective than business-as-usual for Penta3 (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively); PBF also for mCPR (p<0.05). Twenty-one of 26 QOC indicators improved in both PBF and DFF relative to business-as-usual (p<0.05). However, except for deliveries, PBF was as or less effective than DFF: Penta3 immunization and ITN use were each 6% less than DFF (p<0.1 for both) and QOC gains were also comparable. Utilization gains come from the middle of the rural wealth distribution (p<0.05).ConclusionsOur findings show that both PBF and DFF represent significant improvements over business-as-usual for service provision and quality of care. However, except for institutional delivery, PBF and DFF do not differ from each other despite PBF disbursing $2 for every dollar disbursed by DFF. These findings highlight the importance of direct facility financing and decentralization in improving PHC and suggest potential complementarities between the two approaches in strengthening MCH service delivery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03890653 ; May 8, 2017. Retrospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Implementing performance-based financing in peripheral health centres in Mali: what can we learn from it?

Publications

Implementing performance-based financing in peripheral health centres in Mali: what can we learn from it?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets