Dataset Information

Brazil's more doctors programme and infant health outcomes: a longitudinal analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Providing sufficient numbers of human resources for health is essential for effective and accessible health services. Between 2013 and 2018, the Brazilian Ministry of Health implemented the Programa Mais Médicos (PMM) (More Doctors Programme) to increase the supply of primary care doctors in underserved areas of the country. This study investigated the association between PMM and infant health outcomes and assessed if heterogeneity in the impact of PMM varied by municipal socio-economic factors and health indicators.

Methods

An ecological longitudinal (panel) study design was employed to analyse data from 5565 Brazilian municipalities over a 12-year period between 2007 and 2018. A differences-in-differences approach was implemented using longitudinal fixed effect regression models to compare infant health outcomes in municipalities receiving a PMM doctor with those that did not receive a PMM doctor. The impact of PMM was assessed on aggregate and in municipality subgroups.

Results

On aggregate, the PMM was not significantly associated with changes in infant or neonatal mortality, but the PMM was associated with reductions in infant mortality rate (IMR) (of - 0.21; 95% CI: - 0.38, - 0.03) in municipalities with highest IMR prior to the programme's implementation (where (IMR) > 25.2 infant deaths per 1000 live births). The PMM was also associated with an increase in the proportion of expectant mothers receiving seven or more prenatal care visits but only in municipalities with a lower IMR at baseline and high density of non-PMM doctors and community health workers before the PMM.

Conclusions

The PMM was associated with reduced infant mortality in municipalities with the highest infant mortality rate prior to the programme. This suggests effectiveness of the PMM was limited only to the areas of greatest need. New programmes to improve the equitable provision of human resources for health should employ comprehensive targeting approaches balancing health needs and socio-economic factors to maximize effectiveness.

SUBMITTER: Bexson C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8363855 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many countries employ strategies that rest on the use of an explicitly defined set of criteria to identify underserved communities. Yet, we know relatively little about the performance of community-level targeting in large-scale health programmes. To address this gap, we examine the performance of community targeting in the More Doctors Programme (MDP). Our analysis covers all 5570 municipalities in the period between 2013 and 2017 using publicly available data. We first calculate the rate at which vulnerable municipalities enrolled in the MDP. Next, we consider two types of mistargeting: (1) proportion of vulnerable municipalities that did not have any MDP physicians (i.e. under-coverage municipalities) and (2) proportion of MDP enrolees that did not fit the vulnerability criteria (i.e. non-target municipalities). We found that almost 70% of vulnerable municipalities received at least one MDP physician between 2013 and 2017; whereas non-target municipalities constituted 33% of beneficiaries. Targeting performance improved over time. Non-target municipalities had the highest levels of socioeconomic development and greater physician availability. The poverty rate among under-coverage municipalities was almost six times that in non-target municipalities. Under-coverage municipalities had the lowest primary care physician availability. They were also smaller and more sparsely populated. We also found small differences in the political party alignments of mayors and the President between under-coverage and non-target municipalities. Our results suggest that using community-level targeting approaches in large-scale health programmes is a complex process. Programmes using these approaches may face substantial challenges in beneficiary targeting. Our results highlight that policymakers who consider using these approaches should carefully study various municipal characteristics that may influence the implementation process, including the level of socioeconomic development, health supply factors, population characteristics and political party alignments.

Project description:Globally, cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of disease burden and death. Timely and appropriate provision of primary care may lead to sizeable reductions in hospitalizations for a range of chronic and acute health conditions. In this paper, we study the impact of Brazil's More Doctors Program (MDP) on hospitalizations due to cerebrovascular disease and hypertension. We exploit the geographic variation in the uptake of the MPD and combine coarsened exact matching and difference-in-difference methods to construct valid counterfactual estimates. We use data from the Hospital Information System in Unified Health System, the MDP administrative records, the Brazilian Regulatory Agency, the Ministry of Health, and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, covering the years from 2009 to 2017. Our analysis resulted in estimated coefficients of -1.47 (95%CI: -4.04,1.10) for hospitalizations for cerebrovascular disease and -1.20 (95%CI: -5.50,3.11) for hypertension, suggesting an inverse relationship between the MDP and hospitalizations. For cerebrovascular disease, the estimated MDP coefficient was -0.50 (95%CI: -2.94,1.95) in the year of program introduction, -5.21 (95%CI: -9.43,-0.99) and -8.21 (95%CI: -13.68,-2.75) in its third and fourth year of implementation, respectively. Our results further suggest that the beneficial impact of MDP on hospitalizations due to cerebrovascular disease became discernable in urban municipalities starting from the fourth year of implementation. We found no evidence that the MDP led to reductions in hospitalizations due to hypertension. Our results highlight that increased investment in resources devoted to primary care led to improvements in hospitalizations for selected cardiovascular conditions. However, it took time for the beneficial effects of the MDP to become discernable and the Program did not guarantee declines in hospitalizations for all cardiovascular conditions, suggesting that further improvements may be needed to enhance the beneficial impact of the MDP on the level and distribution of population health in Brazil.

Project description:BackgroundMany governments have introduced pay-for-performance programmes to incentivise health providers to improve quality of care. Evidence on whether these programmes reduce or exacerbate disparities in health care is scarce. In this study, we aimed to assess socioeconomic inequalities in the performance of family health teams under Brazil's National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ).MethodsFor this longitudinal study, we analysed data on the quality of care delivered by family health teams participating in PMAQ over three rounds of implementation: round 1 (November, 2011, to March, 2013), round 2 (April, 2013, to September, 2015), and round 3 (October, 2015, to December, 2019). The primary outcome was the percentage of the maximum performance score obtainable by family health teams (the PMAQ score), based on several hundred (ranging from 598 to 914) indicators of health-care delivery. Using census data on household income of local areas, we examined the PMAQ score by income ventile. We used ordinary least squares regressions to examine the association between PMAQ scores and the income of each local area across implementation rounds, and we did an analysis of variance to assess geographical variation in PMAQ score.FindingsOf the 40 361 family health teams that were registered as ever participating in PMAQ, we included 13 934 teams that participated in the three rounds of PMAQ in our analysis. These teams were located in 11 472 census areas and served approximately 48 million people. The mean PMAQ score was 61·0% (median 61·8, IQR 55·3-67·9) in round 1, 55·3% (median 56·0, IQR 47·6-63·4) in round 2, and 61·6% (median 62·7, IQR 54·4-69·9) in round 3. In round 1, we observed a positive socioeconomic gradient, with the mean PMAQ score ranging from 56·6% in the poorest group to 64·1% in the richest group. Between rounds 1 and 3, mean PMAQ performance increased by 7·1 percentage points for the poorest group and decreased by 0·8 percentage points for the richest group (p<0·0001), with the gap between richest and poorest narrowing from 7·5 percentage points (95% CI 6·5 to 8·5) to -0·4 percentage points over the same period (-1·6 to 0·8).InterpretationExisting income inequalities in the delivery of primary health care were eliminated during the three rounds of PMAQ, plausibly due to a design feature of PMAQ that adjusted financial payments for socioeconomic inequalities. However, there remains an important policy agenda in Brazil to address the large inequities in health.FundingUK Medical Research Council, Newton Fund, and CONFAP (Conselho Nacional das Fundações Estaduais de Amparo à Pesquisa).

Project description:IntroductionIn January 2013 a novel type of multicomponent protein-based vaccine against group B meningococcal disease was licensed by the European Medicines Agency. With the widespread use of the meningococcal serogroup C conjugate vaccines, serogroup B remains now the major cause of bacterial meningitis and septicaemia in young children in Europe. The aim of this study is to investigate the health and the economic outcomes of MenB vaccine introduction into the Italian routine mass vaccination programme.MethodsThe present work is structured in two main parts. Firstly, we assess the epidemiological burden of group B meningococcal disease using official hospitalisation and notification data from two of the most populated Italian regions (Lombardia and Piemonte) during a 6-year study period (2007-2012). Secondly, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the immunisation programme in Italy from the public health payer perspective under base case parameters assumptions and performing a comprehensive sensitivity analysis to assess the robustness and the uncertainty of our model results.ResultsMenB serotype is responsible for 59% of the 341 cases of Invasive Meningococcal Disease in Lombardia and Piemonte. Incidence rate for MenB infection is estimated to be 0.21/100,000/y resulting at the highest level in children ≤4 years of age. Although the new MenB vaccine can potentially prevent about one third of the disease cases in the Italian population, model results show this strategy is unlikely to be cost-effective (ICER value over €350,000/QALY) with a vaccine that prevents disease only. These results are robust under most of the sensitivity scenarios except when allowing for lower discount rates.DiscussionThe introduction of the novel vaccine into the routine immunisation schedule needs to be carefully evaluated. The new MenB vaccine has the potential to reduce the disease burden at the population level. However, from the Italian Health Service perspective, the immunisation programme is unlikely to be cost-effective at the current incidence levels and vaccine price.

Project description:Conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs provide poor families with cash conditional on investments in health and education. Brazil's Bolsa Família program began in 2003 and is currently the largest CCT program in the world. This community-based study examines the impact of Bolsa Família on child health in a slum community in a large urban center.In 2010, detailed household surveys were conducted with randomly selected Bolsa Família beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries in a Brazilian slum community of approximately 14,000 inhabitants in a large urban center. 567 families (with 1,266 children) were interviewed. Propensity score methods were used to control for differences between beneficiary and non-beneficiary children to estimate program impacts on health care utilization and health outcomes.Bolsa Família has increased the odds of children's visits to the health post for preventive services. In children under age seven, Bolsa Família was associated with increased odds for growth monitoring (OR?=?3.1; 95% CI 1.9-5.1), vaccinations (OR?=?2.8; 95% CI 1.4-5.4), and checkups (OR?=?1.6; 95% CI 0.98-2.5), and with the number of growth monitoring visits (??=?0.6; p?=?0.049) and checkups (??=?0.2; p?=?0.068). There were positive spillover effects on older siblings (ages 7-17) no longer required to meet the health conditionalities. Bolsa Família increased their odds for growth monitoring (OR?=?2.5; 95% CI 1.3-4.9) and checkups (OR?=?1.7; 95% CI 0.9-3.2) and improved psychosocial health (??=?2.6; p?=?0.007).Bolsa Família has improved health care utilization, especially for services related to the health conditionalites, and there were positive spillover effects on older siblings. The findings of this study are promising, but they also suggest that further improvements in health may depend on the quality of health care services provided, the scope of services linked to the health conditionalities, and coordination with other social safety net programs.

Project description:IntroductionMany parents and carers experience mental health challenges during pregnancy and early postpartum years, and there are cumulative shortfalls in the identification, follow-up, and treatment of those experiencing perinatal and infant mental health (PIMH) challenges. ForWhen is a new national navigation programme in Australia that aims to improve outcomes for families by supporting parents and carers to access PIMH services that best meet their needs. This paper presents the protocol of an evaluation of the ForWhen programme, to be conducted over the first 3 years of its implementation. The specific objectives of the evaluation include examining the characteristics of navigation service delivery, its implementation and clinical impact, and identifying potential moderators of change.Methods and analysisUtilising a mixed-methods design, this evaluation will incorporate three phases that reflect the stages of the programme life-cycle: (1) programme description, (2) implementation evaluation and (3) outcomes evaluation. The evaluation will use a mix of quantitative and qualitative data including deidentified routinely collected service data, participant observations, semistructured interviews, surveys and questionnaires, and a resource audit.DiscussionEvaluation findings will be used to inform the development of a refined clinical navigation model, identify barriers and facilitators to successful navigation programme implementation, examine the impact of the ForWhen programme on client clinical outcomes and health service utilisation, understand how the programme is/can be best embedded in the evolving service system, and assess the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of a national navigation programme in improving health outcomes for PIMH in Australia.Ethics and disseminationThis research was approved by South Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2021/ETH11611). This study was registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622001443785). Results will be disseminated at conferences, in scientific journals, and in a final evaluation report.

Project description:BackgroundAs of December 31, 2020, Brazil had the second-highest burden of COVID-19 worldwide. Given the absence of federal government coordination, it was up to the local governments to maintain healthcare provision for non-COVID health issues. In this descriptive study, we aimed to discuss the SUS functionality and resilience, describing the impact of the pandemic on non-COVID health services delivery while considering the regional inequalities of the allocation of financing health system, health infrastructure and health workforce.MethodsWe used input-output framework based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Health System Building Blocks to estimate health system functionality and resilience. An ecological assessment was designed to calculated mean relative changes to compare the first year of the pandemic in Brazil with the previous one. All data used in this study were anonymized and made available by the Brazilian Ministry of Health. Input indicators were categorized in health system financing (federal funding received as well as expenditure of both state and city governments), health system's infrastructure (hospital beds) and health workforce (healthcare workers positions). Output indicators were categorized into nine different groups of service delivery procedures. To explore the relationship between the variation in procedures with socioeconomic conditions, we used the Socioeconomic Vulnerability Index (SVI).FindingsState governments had a 38·6% increase in federal transfers, while municipal governments had a 33·9% increase. The increase of ICU beds reached its peak in the third quarter of 2020, averaging 72·1% by the end of the year. The country also saw an increase in jobs for registered nurses (13·6%), nurse assistants (8·5%), physiotherapists (7·9%), and medical doctors (4·9%). All procedures underwent expressive reduction: Screenings (-42·6%); Diagnostic procedures (-28·9%); Physician appointments (-42·5%); Low and medium complexity surgeries (-59·7%); High complexity surgeries (-27·9%); Transplants (-44·7%); Treatments and clinical procedures due to injuries of external causes (-19·1%); Irrepressible procedures (-8·5%); and Childbirths (-12·6%). The most significant drop in procedures happened in the first quarter of the pandemic, followed by progressive increase; most regions had not yet recovered by the end of 2020. State-level changes in numbers of procedures point towards a negative trend with SVI.InterpretationThe Brazilian Government did not consider that socioeconomically vulnerable states were at a higher risk of being impacted by the overburden of the health system caused by the COVID-19, which resulted in poorer health system functionality for those vulnerable states. The lack of proper planning to improve health system resilience resulted in the decrease of a quarter of the amount of healthcare procedures increasing the already existing health disparities in the country.FundingMCTIC/CNPQ/FNDCT/MS/SCTIE/DECIT No 07/2020.