BACKGROUND: Public-private mix (PPM), recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), was introduced to cope with the tuberculosis (TB) epidemic worldwide. In many developing countries, PPM has played a powerful role in TB control, while in others it has failed to meet expectations. Thus we performed a systematic review to determine the mechanisms used by global PPM programs implemented in different countries and to evaluate their performance.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of the current literature for original studies published up to May 2014 was done using electronic databases and online resources; these publications were then screened using rigorous criteria. Descriptive information and evaluative outcomes data were extracted from eligible studies for synthesis and analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 78 eligible studies were included in the final review. These assessed 48 PPM TB programs worldwide, subsequently categorized into three mechanisms based on collaborative characteristics: support, contract, and multi-partner group. Furthermore, we assessed the effectiveness of PPM programs against six health system themes, including utilization of the directly observed treatment strategy (DOTS), case detection, treatment outcomes, case management, costs, and access and equity, under the different collaborative mechanisms. Analysis of the comparative studies suggested that PPM could improve overall outcomes of a TB service, and multiple collaborative mechanisms may significantly promote case detection, treatment, referral, and service accessibility, especially in resource-limited areas. However, the less positive outcomes of several programs indicated limited funding and poor governance to be the predominant reasons.
CONCLUSIONS: PPM is a promising strategy to strengthen global TB care and control, but is affected by contextual characteristics in different areas. The scaling-up of PPM should contain essential commonalities, particularly substantial financial support and continuous material input. Additionally, it is important to improve program governance and training for the health providers involved, through integrated collaborative mechanisms.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the design, delivery and outcomes of interventions to improve adherence to treatment for paediatric tuberculosis in low- and middle-income countries and develop a contextual framework for such interventions.
METHODS: We searched PubMed and Cochrane databases for reports published between 1 January 2003 and 1 December 2013 on interventions to improve adherence to treatment for tuberculosis that included patients younger than 20 years who lived in a low- or middle-income country. For potentially relevant articles that lacked paediatric outcomes, we contacted the authors of the studies. We assessed heterogeneity and risk of bias. To evaluate treatment success - i.e. the combination of treatment completion and cure - we performed random-effects meta-analysis. We identified areas of need for improved intervention practices.
FINDINGS: We included 15 studies in 11 countries for the qualitative analysis and of these studies, 11 qualified for the meta-analysis - representing 1279 children. Of the interventions described in the 15 studies, two focused on education, one on psychosocial support, seven on care delivery, four on health systems and one on financial provisions. The children in intervention arms had higher rates of treatment success, compared with those in control groups (odds ratio: 3.02; 95% confidence interval: 2.19-4.15). Using the results of our analyses, we developed a framework around factors that promoted or threatened treatment completion.
CONCLUSION: Various interventions to improve adherence to treatment for paediatric tuberculosis appear both feasible and effective in low- and middle-income countries.
BACKGROUND: The deadline for achieving Millennium Development Goals 4 and 5 is approaching, but inequalities between disadvantaged and other populations is a significant barrier for progress towards achieving these goals. This systematic review aims to collect evidence about the differential effects of interventions on different sociodemographic groups in order to identify interventions that were effective in reducing maternal or child health inequalities.
METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE and other relevant databases. The reference lists of included reviews were also screened to find more eligible studies. We included experimental or observational studies that assessed the effects of interventions on maternal and child health, but only studies that report quantitative inequality outcomes were finally included for analysis.
RESULTS: 22 articles about the effectiveness of interventions on equity in maternal and child health were finally included. These studies covered five kinds of interventions: immunization campaigns, nutrition supplement programs, health care provision improvement interventions, demand side interventions, and mixed interventions. The outcome indicators covered all MDG 4 and three MDG 5 outcomes. None of the included studies looked at equity in maternal mortality, adolescent birth rate and unmet need for family planning. The included studies reported inequalities based on gender, income, education level or comprehensive socioeconomic status. Stronger or moderate evidence showed that all kinds of the included interventions may be more effective in improving maternal or child health for those from disadvantaged groups.
CONCLUSION: Studies about the effectiveness of interventions on equity in maternal or child health are limited. The limited evidence showed that the interventions that were effective in reducing inequity included the improvement of health care delivery by outreach methods, using human resources in local areas or provided at the community level nearest to residents and the provision of financial or knowledge support to demand side.
In order to inform the development of appropriate strategies to improve financial risk protection, we conducted a systematic literature review of the financial burden of tuberculosis (TB) faced by patients and affected families. The mean total costs ranged from $55 to $8198, with an unweighted average of $847. On average, 20% (range 0-62%) of the total cost was due to direct medical costs, 20% (0-84%) to direct non-medical costs, and 60% (16-94%) to income loss. Half of the total cost was incurred before TB treatment. On average, the total cost was equivalent to 58% (range 5-306%) of reported annual individual and 39% (4-148%) of reported household income. Cost as percentage of income was particularly high among poor people and those with multidrug-resistant TB. Commonly reported coping mechanisms included taking a loan and selling household items. The total cost of TB for patients can be catastrophic. Income loss often constitutes the largest financial risk for patients. Apart from ensuring that healthcare services are fairly financed and delivered in a way that minimises direct and indirect costs, there is a need to ensure that TB patients and affected families receive appropriate income replacement and other social protection interventions.
BACKGROUND: The private sector plays a large role in health services delivery in low- and middle-income countries; yet significant gaps remain in the quality and accessibility of private sector services. Clinical social franchising, which applies the commercial franchising model to achieve social goals and improve health care, is increasingly used in developing countries to respond to these limitations. Despite the growth of this approach, limited evidence documents the effect of social franchising on improving health care quality and access.
OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We examined peer-reviewed and grey literature to evaluate the effect of social franchising on health care quality, equity, cost-effectiveness, and health outcomes. We included all studies of clinical social franchise programs located in low- and middle-income countries. We assessed study bias using the WHO-Johns Hopkins Rigour Scale and used narrative synthesis to evaluate the findings.
RESULTS: Of 113 identified articles, 23 were included in this review; these evaluated a small sample of franchises globally and focused on reproductive health franchises. Results varied widely across outcomes and programs. Social franchising was positively associated with increased client volume and client satisfaction. The findings on health care utilization and health impact were mixed; some studies find that franchises significantly outperform other models of health care, while others show franchises are equivalent to or worse than other private or public clinics. In two areas, cost-effectiveness and equity, social franchises were generally found to have poorer outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review indicates that social franchising may strengthen some elements of private sector health care. However, gaps in the evidence remain. Additional research should include: further documentation of the effect of social franchising, evaluating the equity and cost-effectiveness of this intervention, and assessing the role of franchising within the context of the greater healthcare delivery system.
Financial barriers can affect timely access to maternal health services. Health insurance can influence the use and quality of these services and potentially improve maternal and neonatal health outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of the evidence on health insurance and its effects on the use and provision of maternal health services and on maternal and neonatal health outcomes in middle- and low-income countries. Studies were identified through a literature search in key databases and consultation with experts in healthcare financing and maternal health. Twenty-nine articles met the review criteria of focusing on health insurance and its effect on the use or quality of maternal health services, or maternal and neonatal health outcomes. Sixteen studies assessed demand-side effects of insurance, eight focused on supply-side effects, and the remainder addressed both. Geographically, the studies provided evidence from sub-Saharan Africa (n = 11), Asia (n = 9), Latin America (n = 8), and Turkey. The studies included examples from national or social insurance schemes (n = 7), government-run public health insurance schemes (n = 4), community-based health insurance schemes (n = 11), and private insurance (n = 3). Half of the studies used econometric analyses while the remaining provided descriptive statistics or qualitative results. There is relatively consistent evidence that health insurance is positively correlated with the use of maternal health services. Only four studies used methods that can establish this causal relationship. Six studies presented suggestive evidence of over-provision of caesarean sections in response to providers' payment incentives through health insurance. Few studies focused on the relationship between health insurance and the quality of maternal health services or maternal and neonatal health outcomes. The available evidence on the quality and health outcomes is inconclusive, given the differences in measurement, contradictory findings, and statistical limitations. Consistent with economic theories, the studies identified a positive relationship between health insurance and the use of maternal health services. However, more rigorous causal methods are needed to identify the extent to which the use of these services increases among the insured. Better measurement of quality and the use of cross-country analyses would solidify the evidence on the impact of insurance on the quality of maternal health services and maternal and neonatal health outcomes.
INTRODUCTION: Private sector healthcare delivery in low- and middle-income countries is sometimes argued to be more efficient, accountable, and sustainable than public sector delivery. Conversely, the public sector is often regarded as providing more equitable and evidence-based care. We performed a systematic review of research studies investigating the performance of private and public sector delivery in low- and middle-income countries.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: Peer-reviewed studies including case studies, meta-analyses, reviews, and case-control analyses, as well as reports published by non-governmental organizations and international agencies, were systematically collected through large database searches, filtered through methodological inclusion criteria, and organized into six World Health Organization health system themes: accessibility and responsiveness; quality; outcomes; accountability, transparency, and regulation; fairness and equity; and efficiency. Of 1,178 potentially relevant unique citations, data were obtained from 102 articles describing studies conducted in low- and middle-income countries. Comparative cohort and cross-sectional studies suggested that providers in the private sector more frequently violated medical standards of practice and had poorer patient outcomes, but had greater reported timeliness and hospitality to patients. Reported efficiency tended to be lower in the private than in the public sector, resulting in part from perverse incentives for unnecessary testing and treatment. Public sector services experienced more limited availability of equipment, medications, and trained healthcare workers. When the definition of "private sector" included unlicensed and uncertified providers such as drug shop owners, most patients appeared to access care in the private sector; however, when unlicensed healthcare providers were excluded from the analysis, the majority of people accessed public sector care. "Competitive dynamics" for funding appeared between the two sectors, such that public funds and personnel were redirected to private sector development, followed by reductions in public sector service budgets and staff.
CONCLUSIONS: Studies evaluated in this systematic review do not support the claim that the private sector is usually more efficient, accountable, or medically effective than the public sector; however, the public sector appears frequently to lack timeliness and hospitality towards patients.
BACKGROUND: Nonadherence to chronic disease medications is important. A growing body of literature suggests that better delivery of established therapies would save more lives than would discovery of innovations. Our first objective was to quantify the proportion of adherence to statin medications. The second objective was to provide estimates of risk indicators associated with nonadherence to statin medications.
METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of all studies published between database inception and June of 2011 that reviewed adherence, and risk indicators associated with nonadherence, to statin medications.
RESULTS: In the end, 67 studies met our inclusion and exclusion criteria and passed our methodological-quality evaluation. Among observational studies, 49.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48.9%-49.2%) of patients were adherent to statin medications at 1 year of follow-up. Among randomized trials, 90.3% (95% CI, 89.8%-90.8%) of patients were adherent to statin medications at 1 year of follow-up. The association between 147 variables and adherence to statin medications was determined. After meta-analysis, only 6 variables were associated with nonadherence to statin medications: primary prevention (rate ratio = 1.52; 95% CI, 1.50-1.53); new statin users (rate ratio = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.33-1.61); copayment (rate ratio = 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09-1.50; lower income status (rate ratio = 1.26; 95% CI, 1.16-1.37); fewer than 2 lipid tests performed (rate ratio = 1.38; 95% CI, 1.16-1.64), and not having hypertension (rate ratio = 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.21).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides some insight into the extent of nonadherence by study type along with 6 risk indicators associated with nonadherence to statin medications.
BACKGROUND: Healthcare accreditation standards are advocated as an important means of improving clinical practice and organisational performance. Standard development agencies have documented methodologies to promote open, transparent, inclusive development processes where standards are developed by members. They assert that their methodologies are effective and efficient at producing standards appropriate for the health industry. However, the evidence to support these claims requires scrutiny. The study's purpose was to examine the empirical research that grounds the development methods and application of healthcare accreditation standards.
METHODS: A multi-method strategy was employed over the period March 2010 to August 2011. Five academic health research databases (Medline, Psych INFO, Embase, Social work abstracts, and CINAHL) were interrogated, the websites of 36 agencies associated with the study topic were investigated, and a snowball search was undertaken. Search criteria included accreditation research studies, in English, addressing standards and their impact. Searching in stage 1 initially selected 9386 abstracts. In stage 2, this selection was refined against the inclusion criteria; empirical studies (n = 2111) were identified and refined to a selection of 140 papers with the exclusion of clinical or biomedical and commentary pieces. These were independently reviewed by two researchers and reduced to 13 articles that met the study criteria.
RESULTS: The 13 articles were analysed according to four categories: overall findings; standards development; implementation issues; and impact of standards. Studies have only occurred in the acute care setting, predominately in 2003 (n = 5) and 2009 (n = 4), and in the United States (n = 8). A multidisciplinary focus (n = 9) and mixed method approach (n = 11) are common characteristics. Three interventional studies were identified, with the remaining 10 studies having research designs to investigate clinical or organisational impacts. No study directly examined standards development or other issues associated with their progression. Only one study noted implementation issues, identifying several enablers and barriers. Standards were reported to improve organisational efficiency and staff circumstances. However, the impact on clinical quality was mixed, with both improvements and a lack of measurable effects recorded.
CONCLUSION: Standards are ubiquitous within healthcare and are generally considered to be an important means by which to improve clinical practice and organisational performance. However, there is a lack of robust empirical evidence examining the development, writing, implementation and impacts of healthcare accreditation standards.
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.
Public-private mix (PPM), recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), was introduced to cope with the tuberculosis (TB) epidemic worldwide. In many developing countries, PPM has played a powerful role in TB control, while in others it has failed to meet expectations. Thus we performed a systematic review to determine the mechanisms used by global PPM programs implemented in different countries and to evaluate their performance.
METHODS:
A comprehensive search of the current literature for original studies published up to May 2014 was done using electronic databases and online resources; these publications were then screened using rigorous criteria. Descriptive information and evaluative outcomes data were extracted from eligible studies for synthesis and analysis.
RESULTS:
A total of 78 eligible studies were included in the final review. These assessed 48 PPM TB programs worldwide, subsequently categorized into three mechanisms based on collaborative characteristics: support, contract, and multi-partner group. Furthermore, we assessed the effectiveness of PPM programs against six health system themes, including utilization of the directly observed treatment strategy (DOTS), case detection, treatment outcomes, case management, costs, and access and equity, under the different collaborative mechanisms. Analysis of the comparative studies suggested that PPM could improve overall outcomes of a TB service, and multiple collaborative mechanisms may significantly promote case detection, treatment, referral, and service accessibility, especially in resource-limited areas. However, the less positive outcomes of several programs indicated limited funding and poor governance to be the predominant reasons.
CONCLUSIONS:
PPM is a promising strategy to strengthen global TB care and control, but is affected by contextual characteristics in different areas. The scaling-up of PPM should contain essential commonalities, particularly substantial financial support and continuous material input. Additionally, it is important to improve program governance and training for the health providers involved, through integrated collaborative mechanisms.
