Search

Background: The National Health Mission (NHM), the largest ever publicly funded health programme worldwide, used over half of the national health budget in India and primarily aimed to improve maternal and child health in the country. Though large scale public health investment has improved the health care utilization and health outcomes across states and socio-economic groups in India, little is known on the equity concern of NHM. In this context, this paper examines the utilization pattern and net benefit of public subsidy for institutional delivery by the level of care in India. Methods: Data from the most recent round of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS 4), conducted during 2015–16, was used in the study. A total of 148,645 last birth delivered in a health centre during the 5 years preceding the survey were used for the analyses. Out-of-pocket (OOP) payment on delivery care was taken as the dependent variable and was analysed by primary care and secondary level of care. Benefits Incidence Analysis (BIA), descriptive statistics, concentration index (CI), and concentration curve (CC) were used to do the analysis. Results: Institutional delivery from the public health centres in India is pro-poor and has a strong economic gradient. However, about 28% mothers from richest wealth quintile did not pay for delivery in public health centres compared to 16% among the poorest wealth quintile. Benefit incidence analyses suggests a pro-poor distribution of institutional delivery both at primary and secondary level of care. In 2015–16, at the primary level, about 32.29% of subsidies were used by the poorest, 27.22% by poorer, 20.39% by middle, 13.36% by richer and 6.73% by the richest wealth quintile. The pattern at the secondary level was similar, though the magnitude was lower. The concentration index of institutional delivery in public health centres was − 0.161 [95% CI, − 0.158, − 0.165] compared to 0.296 [95% CI, 0.289, 0.303] from private health centres. Conclusion: Provision and use of public subsidy for institutional delivery in public health centres is pro-poor in India. Improving the quality of service in primary health centres is recommended to increase utilisation and reduce OOP payment for health care in India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To investigate the nature and context of mistreatment during labour and childbirth at public and private sector maternity facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. Methods: This study analyses mixed-methods data obtained through systematic clinical observations and open-ended comments recorded by the observers to describe care provision for 275 mothers and their newborns at 26 hospitals in three districts of Uttar Pradesh from 26 May to 8 July 2015. We conducted a bivariate descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and used a thematic approach to analyse qualitative data. Findings: All women in the study encountered at least one indicator of mistreatment. There was a high prevalence of not offering birthing position choice (92%) and routine manual exploration of the uterus (80%) in facilities in both sectors. Private sector facilities performed worse than the public sector for not allowing birth companions (p = 0.02) and for perineal shaving (p = < 0.001), whereas the public sector performed worse for not ensuring adequate privacy (p = < 0.001), not informing women prior to a vaginal examination (p = 0.01) and for physical violence (p = 0.04). Prepared comments by observers provide further contextual insights into the quantitative data, and additional themes of mistreatment, such as deficiencies in infection prevention, lack of analgesia for episiotomy, informal payments and poor hygiene standards at maternity facilities were identified. Conclusions: Mistreatment of women frequently occurs in both private and public sector facilities. This paper contributes to the literature on mistreatment of women during labour and childbirth at maternity facilities in India by articulating new constructs of overtreatment and under-treatment. There are five key implications of this study. First, a systematic and context-specific effort to measure mistreatment in public and private sector facilities in high burden states in India is required. Second, a training initiative to orient all maternity care personnel to the principles of respectful maternity care would be useful. Third, innovative mechanisms to improve accountability towards respectful maternity care are required. Fourth, participatory community and health system interventions to support respectful maternity care would be useful. Lastly, we note that there needs to be a long-term, sustained investment in health systems so that supportive and enabling work-environments are available to front- line health workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Universal health coverage (UHC) has emerged as one of the important health policy discourses under the current sustainable development goals in the world. UHC in individual disease conditions is a must for attaining overall UHC. This study measures progress towards UHC in terms of access to health care and financial protection among individuals with mental disorders in India. Methods: Data from the 75th Round National Sample Survey (NSS), 2017-18, was used, which is the latest round on health in India. Data collected from 555,115 individuals (rural: 325,232; urban: 229,232), from randomly selected 8077 villages and 6181 urban areas, included 283 outpatient and 374 hospitalization cases due to mental disorders in India. Logistic regression models were used for analyses. Results: Self-reporting of mental disorders was considerably lower than the actual disease burden in India. However, self-reporting of ailment was 1.73 times higher (95% CI: 1.18–2.52, p < 0.05) among the richest income group population compared to the poorest in India. The private sector was a major service provider of mental health services with a larger share for outpatient (66.1%) than inpatient care (59.2%). Over 63% of individuals with a mental disorder who reported private sector hospitalization noted unavailability or poor service quality at public facilities. Only 23% of individuals hospitalized had health insurance coverage at All India level. However, health insurance coverage among poorest economic class was a meagre 3.4%. Average out-of-pocket expenditure during hospitalization (public: 123 USD; private: 576 USD) and outpatient care (public: 8 USD; private: 37 USD) was significantly higher in the private sector than in the public sector. Chances of facing catastrophic health expenditure at 10% threshold were 23.33 times (95% CI: 10.85–50.17; p < 0.001) higher under private sector than public sector during hospitalization. Expenditure on medicine, as the share of total medical expenditure, was highest for hospitalization (public: 45%, private:39.5%) and outpatient care (public: 74.1%, private:39.7%). Conclusions: Social determinants play a vital role in access to healthcare and financial protection among individuals with mental disorders in India. For achieving UHC in mental disorders, India needs to address the gaps in access and financial protection for individuals with mental disorders. Trial registration: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Though Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) under National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) is successful in increasing antenatal and natal care services, little is known on the cost coverage of out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) on maternal care services post-NRHM period.Methods: Using data from a community-based study of 424 recently delivered women in Rajasthan, this paper examined the variation in OOPE in accessing maternal health services and the extent to which JSY incentives covered the burden of cost incurred. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses are used to understand the differential and determinants of OOPE.Results: The mean OOPE for antenatal care was US$26 at public health centres and US$64 at private health centres. The OOPE (antenatal and natal) per delivery was US$32 if delivery was conducted at home, US$78 at public facility and US$154 at private facility. The OOPE varied by the type of delivery, delivery with complications and place of ANC. The OOPE in public health centre was US$44 and US$145 for normal and complicated delivery, respectively. The share of JSY was 44 % of the total cost per delivery, 77 % in case of normal delivery and 23 % for complicated delivery. Results from the log linear model suggest that economic status, educational level and pregnancy complications are significant predictors of OOPE.Conclusions: Our results suggest that JSY has increased the coverage of institutional delivery and reduced financial stress to household and families but not sufficient for complicated delivery. Provisioning of providing sonography/other test and treating complicated cases in public health centres need to be strengthened. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Benefit Incidence Analysis (BIA) is used to understand the distribution of health care utilization and spending in comparison to income distribution. The results can illustrate how effectively governments allocate limited resources towards meeting the needs of the poor. In analyzing the distribution of public spending on inpatient, outpatient, and deliveries, this paper represents the most recent BIA completed in India. Methods: In order to conduct the BIA statistical analysis for this project, 2014 utilization data from the most recently completed Indian National Sample Survey (NSS) was used. Unit costs were estimated for primary care, hospital inpatient, hospital outpatient, and deliveries. Concentration curves and concentration indices were estimated both at the national and state levels. Analyses were reported for overall utilization, as well as for the gross and net benefits for inpatient, outpatient, and deliveries. Results: According to the results, utilization of government inpatient and delivery services is pro-poor. When gross and net benefits are included in the analysis, services become more equal and less pro-poor. Gross benefits, which are measured with state-level unit costs, are virtually equal for all services. Although there are some pro-poor gross benefits trends for national outpatient services, the results also show that the equality of national gross benefits trends hides a significant disparity across Indian States. While a number of Indian States have outpatient gross benefits that are pro-poor, few show pro-poor benefits for inpatient and delivery services. Net benefits, which considers both unit costs for each respective service, and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures, trend similarly to gross benefits. In addition, those who use public facilities spend considerable OOP to supplement government services. Conclusions: This BIA reveals that government spending on public health care has not resulted in significantly pro-poor services. While some progress has been made relative to deliveries and outpatient services, inpatient stays are not pro-poor. In addition, national results mask significant disparities across Indian states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Women developing Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) are subsequently at a higher risk of developing Type 2 Diabetes later in life. Screening and effective management of women with GDM are essential in preventing progression to type 2 diabetes mellitus. We aimed to explore the perspectives of healthcare providers regarding the barriers from the health system context that restrict the timely screening and effective management of GDM. Methods: We conducted six in-depth interviews of health care providers- four with nurses and two with obstetricians in the public hospitals in India's major city (Bengaluru). The interviews were conducted in the preferred language of the participants (Kannada for nurses, English for the obstetricians) and audio-recorded. All Kannada interviews were transcribed and translated into English for analysis. The primary data were analyzed using the grounded theory approach by NVivo 12 plus. The findings are put into perspective using the socio-ecological model. Results: Health care providers identified delayed visits to public hospitals and stress on household-level responsibilities as barriers at the individual level for GDM screening. Also, migration of pregnant women to their natal homes during first pregnancy is a cultural barrier in addition to health system barriers such as unmet nurse training needs, long waiting hours, uneven power dynamics, lack of follow-up, resource scarcity, and lack of supportive oversight. The barriers for GDM management included non-reporting women to follow - up visits, irregular self-monitoring of drug and blood sugar, trained staff shortage, ineffective tracking, and lack of standardized protocol. Conclusion: There is a pressing need to develop and improve existing GDM Screening and Management services to tackle the growing burden of GDM in public hospitals of India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Improving quality of care is a key priority to reduce neonatal mortality and stillbirths. The Safe Care, Saving Lives programme aimed to improve care in newborn care units and labour wards of 60 public and private hospitals in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, India, using a collaborative quality improvement approach. Our external evaluation of this programme aimed to evaluate programme effects on implementation of maternal and newborn care practices, and impact on stillbirths, 7- and 28-day neonatal mortality rate in labour wards and neonatal care units. We also aimed to evaluate programme implementation and mechanisms of change.Methods: We used a quasi-experimental plausibility design with a nested process evaluation. We evaluated effects on stillbirths, mortality and secondary outcomes relating to adherence to 20 evidence-based intrapartum and newborn care practices, comparing survey data from 29 hospitals receiving the intervention to 31 hospitals expected to receive the intervention later, using a difference-in-difference analysis. We analysed programme implementation data and conducted 42 semi-structured interviews in four case studies to describe implementation and address four theory-driven questions to explain the quantitative results.Results: Only 7 of the 29 intervention hospitals were engaged in the intervention for its entire duration. There was no evidence of an effect of the intervention on stillbirths [DiD - 1.3 percentage points, 95% CI - 2.6-0.1], on neonatal mortality at age 7 days [DiD - 1.6, 95% CI - 9-6.2] or 28 days [DiD - 3.0, 95% CI - 12.9-6.9] or on adherence to target evidence-based intrapartum and newborn care practices. The process evaluation identified challenges in engaging leaders; challenges in developing capacity for quality improvement; and challenges in activating mechanisms of change at the unit level, rather than for a few individuals, and in sustaining these through the creation of new social norms.Conclusion: Despite careful planning and substantial resources, the intervention was not feasible for implementation on a large scale. Greater focus is required on strategies to engage leadership. Quality improvement may need to be accompanied by clinical training. Further research is also needed on quality improvement using a health systems perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multimorbidity in primary care is a challenge not only for developing countries but also for low and medium income countries (LMIC). Health services in LMIC countries are being provided by both public and private health care providers. However, a critical knowledge gap exists on understanding the true extent of multimorbidity in both types of primary care settings. Methods: We undertook a study to identify multimorbidity prevalence and healthcare utilization among both public and private primary care attendees in Odisha state of India. A total of 1649 patients attending 40 primary care facilities were interviewed using a structured multimorbidity assessment questionnaire collecting information on 22 chronic diseases, medication use, number of hospitalization and number of outpatient visits. Result: The overall prevalence of multimorbidity was 28.3% and nearly one third of patients of public facilities and one fourth from private facilities had multimorbidity. Leading diseases among patients visiting public facilities included acid peptic diseases, arthritis and chronic back pain. No significant difference in reporting of hypertension and diabetes across the facilities was seen. Besides age, predictors of multimorbidity among patients attending public facilities were, females [AOR: 1.6; 95% CI 1.1–1.3] and non-aboriginal groups [AOR: 1.6; 95%CI 1.1–2.3] whereas, in private females [AOR: 1.6; 95%CI 1.1–2.4], better socioeconomic conditions [AOR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0–2.1] and higher educational status [primary school completed [AOR 2.6; 95%CI 1.6–4.2] and secondary schooling and above [AOR 2.0; 95%CI 1.1–3.6] with reference to no education were seen to be the determinants of multimorbidity. Increased number of hospital visits to public facilities were higher among lower educational status patients [IRR: 1.57; 95% CI 1.13–2.18] whereas, among private patients, the mean number of hospital visits was 1.70 times more in higher educational status [IRR: 1.70; 95%CI 1.01–3.69]. The mean number of medicines taken per day was higher among patients attending private hospitals. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that, multimorbidity is being more reported in public primary care facilities. The pattern and health care utilization in both types of settings are different. A comprehensive care approach must be designed for private care providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To expand access to safe deliveries, some developing countries have initiated demand-side financing schemes promoting institutional delivery. In the context of conditional cash incentive scheme and free maternity care in public health facilities in India, studies have highlighted high out of pocket expenditure (OOPE) of Indian families for delivery and maternity care. In this context the study assesses the components of OOPE that women incurred while accessing maternity care in public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. It also assesses the determinants of OOPE and the level of maternal satisfaction while accessing care from these facilities. Method: It is a cross-sectional analysis of 558 recently delivered women who have delivered at four public health facilities in Uttar Pradesh, India. All OOPE related information was collected through interviews using structured pre-tested questionnaires. Frequencies, Mann-Whitney test and categorical regression were used for data reduction. Results: The analysis showed that the median OOPE was INR 700 (US$ 11.48) which varied between INR 680 (US$ 11.15) for normal delivery and INR 970 (US$ 15.9) for complicated cases. Tips for getting services (consisting of gifts and tips for services) with a median value of INR 320 (US$ 5.25) contributed to the major share in OOPE. Women from households with income more than INR 4000 (US$ 65.57) per month, general castes, primi-gravida, complicated delivery and those not accompanied by community health workers incurred higher OOPE. The significant predictors for high OOPE were caste (General Vs. OBC, SC/ST), type of delivery (Complicated Vs. Normal), and presence of ASHA (No Vs. Yes). OOPE while accessing care for delivery was one among the least satisfactory items and 76 % women expressed their dissatisfaction. Conclusion: Even though services at the public health facilities in India are supposed to be provided free of cost, it is actually not free, and the women in this study paid almost half of their mandated cash incentives to obtain delivery care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Emergency Neonatal Care (EmNC) is an important service for the health and survival of newborns. The objective of our study was to assess the availability of emergency neonatal care services in the north-eastern region of Karnataka state in India.Methods: We undertook a cross-sectional epidemiologic study in the year 2010. We assessed the provision of eight life-saving 'signal functions' (Comprehensive EmNC) or at least five 'signal functions' (Basic EmNC) by self-reporting through a structured questionnaire, coupled with verification by direct observation for presence of drugs and equipment in the prior three months. The assessment was undertaken in 443 government and 422 private healthcare facilities of eight districts of Karnataka.Results: There was an average of 3.6 EmNC facilities available per 500,000 population for the entire region. Only three out of eight districts and 10 of 42 sub-districts in the region had the recommended [greater than or equal to 5] EmNC facilities per 500,000. Further, over 95 % of CEmNC facilities and 88 % of BEmNC facilities were within the private sector. About 80 % of government hospitals at district and sub-district levels did not have EmNC capability.Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of using a simple assessment tool to measure health facility availability of life-saving services for newborn care. EmNC availability was seen to be suboptimal at the regional, district and sub-district levels within the northern part of Karnataka state. There is a need to improve availability of emergency newborn care in health facilities, with special emphasis on equity at population level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]