Dataset Information

Autocratisation and universal health coverage: synthetic control study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To assess the relation between autocratisation-substantial decreases in democratic traits (free and fair elections, freedom of civil and political association, and freedom of expression)-and countries' population health outcomes and progress toward universal health coverage (UHC). DESIGN:Synthetic control analysis. SETTING AND COUNTRY SELECTION:Global sample of countries for all years from 1989 to 2019, split into two categories: 17 treatment countries that started autocratising during 2000 to 2010, and 119 control countries that never autocratised from 1989 to 2019. The treatment countries comprised low and middle income nations and represent all world regions except North America and western Europe. A weighted combination of control countries was used to construct synthetic controls for each treatment country. This statistical method is especially well suited to population level studies when random assignment is infeasible and sufficiently similar comparators are not available. The method was originally developed in economics and political science to assess the impact of policies and events, and it is now increasingly used in epidemiology. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:HIV-free life expectancy at age 5 years, UHC effective coverage index (0-100 point scale), and out-of-pocket spending on health per capita. All outcome variables are for the period 1989 to 2019. RESULTS:Autocratising countries underperformed for all three outcome variables in the 10 years after the onset of autocratisation, despite some improvements in life expectancy, UHC effective coverage index, and out-of-pocket spending on health. On average, HIV-free life expectancy at age 5 years increased by 2.2% (from 64.7 to 66.1 years) during the 10 years after the onset of autocratisation. This study estimated that it would have increased by 3.5% (95% confidence interval 3.3% to 3.6%, P<0.001) (from 64.7 to 66.9 years) in the absence of autocratisation. On average, the UHC effective coverage index increased by 11.9% (from 42.5 to 47.6 points) during the 10 years after the onset of autocratisation. This study estimated that it would have increased by 20.2% (95% confidence interval 19.6% to 21.2%, P<0.001) (from 42.5 to 51.1 points) in the absence of autocratisation. Finally, on average, out-of-pocket spending on health per capita increased by 10.0% (from $4.00 (£3.1; €3.4) to $4.4, log transformed) during the 10 years after the onset of autocratisation. This study estimated that it would have increased by only 4.4% (95% confidence interval 3.9% to 4.6%, P<0.001) (from $4.0 to $4.2, log transformed) in the absence of autocratisation. CONCLUSIONS:Autocratising countries had worse than estimated life expectancy, effective health service coverage, and levels of out-of-pocket spending on health. These results suggest that the noticeable increase in the number of countries that are experiencing democratic erosion in recent years is hindering population health gains and progress toward UHC. Global health institutions will need to adjust their policy recommendations and activities to obtain the best possible results in those countries with a diminishing democratic incentive to provide quality healthcare to populations.

SUBMITTER: Wigley S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7582133 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Autocratisation and universal health coverage: synthetic control study.

Wigley Simon S Dieleman Joseph L JL Templin Tara T Mumford John Everett JE Bollyky Thomas J TJ

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20201023

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the relation between autocratisation-substantial decreases in democratic traits (free and fair elections, freedom of civil and political association, and freedom of expression)-and countries' population health outcomes and progress toward universal health coverage (UHC).<h4>Design</h4>Synthetic control analysis.<h4>Setting and country selection</h4>Global sample of countries for all years from 1989 to 2019, split into two categories: 17 treatment countries that starte ...[more]

PMID: 33097492

Similar Datasets

Project description:Monitoring universal health coverage (UHC) focuses on information on health intervention coverage and financial protection. This paper addresses monitoring intervention coverage, related to the full spectrum of UHC, including health promotion and disease prevention, treatment, rehabilitation, and palliation. A comprehensive core set of indicators most relevant to the country situation should be monitored on a regular basis as part of health progress and systems performance assessment for all countries. UHC monitoring should be embedded in a broad results framework for the country health system, but focus on indicators related to the coverage of interventions that most directly reflect the results of UHC investments and strategies in each country. A set of tracer coverage indicators can be selected, divided into two groups-promotion/prevention, and treatment/care-as illustrated in this paper. Disaggregation of the indicators by the main equity stratifiers is critical to monitor progress in all population groups. Targets need to be set in accordance with baselines, historical rate of progress, and measurement considerations. Critical measurement gaps also exist, especially for treatment indicators, covering issues such as mental health, injuries, chronic conditions, surgical interventions, rehabilitation, and palliation. Consequently, further research and proxy indicators need to be used in the interim. Ideally, indicators should include a quality of intervention dimension. For some interventions, use of a single indicator is feasible, such as management of hypertension; but in many areas additional indicators are needed to capture quality of service provision. The monitoring of UHC has significant implications for health information systems. Major data gaps will need to be filled. At a minimum, countries will need to administer regular household health surveys with biological and clinical data collection. Countries will also need to improve the production of reliable, comprehensive, and timely health facility data. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:BackgroundDisease Control Priorities, 3rd edition (DCP3), published two model health benefits packages (HBPs). This study estimates the overall costs and individual component costs of these packages in low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (lower-MICs).MethodsThis study reports on our Disease Control Priorities Cost Model (DCP-CM), developed as part of the DCP3 project to determine the overall costs of the 218 health sector interventions recommended in the model HBP termed essential universal health coverage (EUHC). Model inputs included data on intervention unit costs, demographic and epidemiological data to quantify the populations in need of specific interventions, baseline coverage indicators, and estimates of required health system costs to support direct service delivery. The DCP-CM was informed primarily by published estimates of economic costs of interventions measured from the health system perspective. We estimated counterfactual annual costs for the year 2015. We disaggregated costs according to intervention characteristics (delivery platform, delivery timing, and health system objective) and did one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses with determination of 95% credible intervals (Crls).FindingsAt 80% population coverage, the annual cost of EUHC would be US$79 (95% Crl 60-110) per capita (in 2016 US dollars) in LICs and US$130 (100-180) per capita in lower-MICs. As a share of 2015 gross national income (GNI), additional investments would require 8·0% (95% Crl 5·7-11·3) in LICs and 4·2% (2·9-5·9) in lower-MICs. A highest priority subpackage comprising 115 of the EUHC interventions would cost approximately half of these amounts (3·7% [2·6-5·3] of 2015 GNI in LICs and 2·0% [1·4-2·8] in lower-MICs). Mortality-reducing interventions would require around two-thirds of the overall package costs, with interventions to reduce mortality at age 5-69 years from non-communicable disease and injury comprising the highest share of total EUHC costs in both income groups (37·6% [37·2-37·9] in LICs and 43·0% [42·6-43·4] in lower-MICs). Interventions addressing chronic health conditions (requiring 45·5% [44·8-46·4] 2015 GNI for LICs and lower-MICs combined) and interventions delivered in health centres (requiring 49·8% [49·5-50·2] 2015 GNI for LICs and lower-MICs combined) would each comprise the plurality of costs.InterpretationImplementation of EUHC would require costly investment, especially in LICs. DCP-CM is available as an online tool that can inform local HBP deliberation and support efficient investment in UHC, especially as countries pivot towards non-communicable disease and injury care.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Trond Mohn Foundation, and Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Project description:BackgroundThe progress of Universal health coverage (UHC) is measured using tracer indicators of key interventions, which have been implemented in healthcare system. UHC is about population, comprehensive health services and financial coverage for equitable quality services and health outcome. There is dearth of evidence about the extent of the universality of UHC in terms of types of health services, its integrated definition (dimensions) and tracer indicators utilized in the measurement of UHC. Therefore, we mapped the existing literature to assess universality of UHC and summarize the challenges towards UHC.MethodsThe checklist Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews was used. A systematic search was carried out in the Web of Science and PubMed databases. Hand searches were also conducted to find articles from Google Scholar, the World Bank Library, the World Health Organization Library, the United Nations Digital Library Collections, and Google. Article search date was between 20 October 2021 and 12 November 2021 and the most recent update was done on 03 March 2022. Articles on UHC coverage, financial risk protection, quality of care, and inequity were included. The Population, Concept, and Context framework was used to determine the eligibility of research questions. A stepwise approach was used to identify and select relevant studies, conduct data charting, collation and summarization, as well as report results. Simple descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were used to present the findings.ResultsForty-seven papers were included in the final review. One-fourth of the articles (25.5%) were from the African region and 29.8% were from lower-middle-income countries. More than half of the articles (54.1%) followed a quantitative research approach. Of included articles, coverage was assessed by 53.2% of articles; financial risk protection by 27.7%, inequity by 25.5% and quality by 6.4% of the articles as the main research objectives or mentioned in result section. Most (42.5%) of articles investigated health promotion and 2.1% palliation and rehabilitation services. Policy and healthcare level and cross-cutting barriers of UHC were identified. Financing, leadership/governance, inequity, weak regulation and supervision mechanism, and poverty were most repeated policy level barriers. Poor quality health services and inadequate health workforce were the common barriers from health sector challenges. Lack of common understanding on UHC was frequently mentioned as a cross-cutting barrier.ConclusionsThe review showed that majority of the articles were from the African region. Methodologically, quantitative research design was more frequently used to investigate UHC. Palliation and rehabilitation health care services need attention in the monitoring and evaluation of UHC progress. It is also noteworthy to focus on quality and inequity of health services. The study implies that urgent action on the identified policy, health system and cross-cutting barriers is required to achieve UHC.

Project description:BackgroundIn sub-Saharan Africa, universal health coverage (UHC) reforms have often adopted a technocratic top-down approach, with little attention being paid to the rural communities' perspective in identifying context specific gaps to inform the design of such reforms. This approach might shape reforms that are not sufficiently responsive to local needs. Our study explored how rural communities experience and define gaps in universal health coverage in Malawi, a country which endorses free access to an Essential Health Package (EHP) as a means towards universal health coverage.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative cross-sectional study in six rural communities in Malawi. Data was collected from 12 Focus Group Discussions with community residents and triangulated with 8 key informant interviews with health care providers. All respondents were selected through stratified purposive sampling. The material was tape-recorded, fully transcribed, and coded by three independent researchers.ResultsThe results showed that the EHP has created a universal sense of entitlements to free health care at the point of use. However, respondents reported uneven distribution of health facilities and poor implementation of public-private service level agreements, which have led to geographical inequities in population coverage and financial protection. Most respondents reported affordability of medical costs at private facilities and transport costs as the main barriers to universal financial protection. From the perspective of rural Malawians, gaps in financial protection are mainly triggered by supply-side access-related barriers in the public health sector such as: shortages of medicines, emergency services, shortage of health personnel and facilities, poor health workers' attitudes, distance and transportation difficulties, and perceived poor quality of health services.ConclusionsMoving towards UHC in Malawi, therefore, implies the introduction of appropriate interventions to fill the financial protection gaps in the private sector and the access-related gaps in the public sector and/or an effective public-private partnership that completely integrates both sectors. Current universal health coverage reforms need to address context specific gaps and be carefully crafted to avoid creating a sense of universal entitlements in principle, which may not be effectively received by beneficiaries due to contextual and operational bottlenecks.

Project description:BackgroundThe initial purpose of healthcare systems around the world is to promote and maintain the health of the population. Universal Health Coverage (UHC) is a new approach by which a healthcare system can reach its goals. World Health Organization (WHO) emphasized maximum population coverage, health service coverage, and financial protection, as three dimensions of UHC. In progress for achieving UHC, recognizing the influential factors allows us to accelerate such progress. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the influential factors to achieve UHC in Iran.MethodsThis is a multi-method study was conducted in four phases: First, a systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify the factors in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Cochrane library, and Science Direct databases, and hand searching google scholar search engine. For recognizing the unmentioned factors, a qualitative study consisting of one session of Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and five semi-structured interviews with experts was designed. The extracted factors were merged and categorized by round table discussion. Finally, the pre-categorized factors were refined and re-categorized under the health system's control knobs framework during three expert panel sessions.ResultsFinally, 33 studies were included. Eight hundred two factors were extracted through systematic review and 96 factors through FGD and interviews (totally, 898). After refining them by the experts' panel, 105 factors were categorized within the control knob framework (financing 19, payment system7, Organization 23, regulation and supervision 33, Behavior 11, and Others 12). The majority of the identified factors were related to the "regulation and supervision" dimension, whilst the "payment system" entailed the fewest. The political commitment during political turmoil, excessive attention to the treatment, referral system, paying out of pocket(OOP) and protection against high costs, economic growth, sanctions, conflict of interests, weakness of the information system, prioritization of services, health system fragmented, lack of managerial support and lack of standard benefits packages were identified as the leading factors on the way to UHC.ConclusionConsidering the distinctive role of the context in policymaking, the identification of the factors affecting UHC accompanying by the countries' experiences about UHC, can boost our speed toward it. Moreover, adopting a long-term plan toward UHC based on these factors and the robust implementation of it pave the way for Iran to achieve better outcomes comparing to their efforts.

Dataset Information

Autocratisation and universal health coverage: synthetic control study.

Publications

Autocratisation and universal health coverage: synthetic control study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets