Informal health care providers (IPs) comprise a significant component of health systems in developing nations. Yet little is known about the most basic characteristics of performance, cost, quality, utilization, and size of this sector. To address this gap we conducted a comprehensive literature review on the informal health care sector in developing countries. We searched for studies published since 2000 through electronic databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and relevant grey literature from The New York Academy of Medicine, The World Bank, The Center for Global Development, USAID, SHOPS (formerly PSP-One), The World Health Organization, DFID, Human Resources for Health Global Resource Center. In total, 334 articles were retrieved, and 122 met inclusion criteria and chosen for data abstraction. Results indicate that IPs make up a significant portion of the healthcare sector globally, with almost half of studies (48%) from Sub-Saharan Africa. Utilization estimates from 24 studies in the literature of IP for healthcare services ranged from 9% to 90% of all healthcare interactions, depending on the country, the disease in question, and methods of measurement. IPs operate in a variety of health areas, although baseline information on quality is notably incomplete and poor quality of care is generally assumed. There was a wide variation in how quality of care is measured. The review found that IPs reported inadequate drug provision, poor adherence to clinical national guidelines, and that there were gaps in knowledge and provider practice; however, studies also found that the formal sector also reported poor provider practices. Reasons for using IPs included convenience, affordability, and social and cultural effects. Recommendations from the literature amount to a call for more engagement with the IP sector. IPs are a large component of nearly all developing country health systems. Research and policies of engagement are needed.
BACKGROUND There is a growing interest in the role of private health providers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Informal private providers (IPPs) provide a significant portion of health care in many LMICs, but they have not received training in allopathic medicine. Interventions have been developed to take advantage of their potential to expand access to essential health services, although their success is not well measured. This paper addresses this information gap through a review of interventions designed to improve the quality, coverage, or costs of health services provided by IPPs in LMICs. METHODS A search for published literature in the last 15 years for any intervention dealing with IPPs in a LMIC, where at least one outcome was measured, was conducted through electronic databases PubMed and Global Health, as well as Google for grey literature from the Internet. RESULTS A total of 1272 articles were retrieved, of which 70 separate studies met inclusion criteria. The majority (70%) of outcomes measured proximate indicators such as provider knowledge (61% were positive) and behaviour (56% positive). Training IPPs was the most common intervention tested (77% of studies), but the more effective strategies did not involve training alone. Interventions that changed the institutional relationships and contributed to changing the incentives and accountability environment were most successful, and often required combinations of interventions. CONCLUSION Although there are documented interventions among IPPs, there are few good quality studies. Strategies that change the market conditions for IPPs-by changing incentives and accountability-appear more likely to succeed than those that depend on building individual capacities of IPPs. Understanding the effectiveness of these and other strategies will also require more rigorous research designs that assess contextual factors and document outcomes over longer periods.
Informal health care providers (IPs) comprise a significant component of health systems in developing nations. Yet little is known about the most basic characteristics of performance, cost, quality, utilization, and size of this sector. To address this gap we conducted a comprehensive literature review on the informal health care sector in developing countries. We searched for studies published since 2000 through electronic databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and relevant grey literature from The New York Academy of Medicine, The World Bank, The Center for Global Development, USAID, SHOPS (formerly PSP-One), The World Health Organization, DFID, Human Resources for Health Global Resource Center. In total, 334 articles were retrieved, and 122 met inclusion criteria and chosen for data abstraction. Results indicate that IPs make up a significant portion of the healthcare sector globally, with almost half of studies (48%) from Sub-Saharan Africa. Utilization estimates from 24 studies in the literature of IP for healthcare services ranged from 9% to 90% of all healthcare interactions, depending on the country, the disease in question, and methods of measurement. IPs operate in a variety of health areas, although baseline information on quality is notably incomplete and poor quality of care is generally assumed. There was a wide variation in how quality of care is measured. The review found that IPs reported inadequate drug provision, poor adherence to clinical national guidelines, and that there were gaps in knowledge and provider practice; however, studies also found that the formal sector also reported poor provider practices. Reasons for using IPs included convenience, affordability, and social and cultural effects. Recommendations from the literature amount to a call for more engagement with the IP sector. IPs are a large component of nearly all developing country health systems. Research and policies of engagement are needed.
