Search

Background: Utilisation of continuum of maternal health care services is crucial for a healthy pregnancy and childbirth and plays an important role in attaining Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to maternal and child health. This paper aims to assess the percentage of dropouts across various stages of utilization of continuum of maternal health services (CMHS) in India and also investigates the factors hindering the utilization of these services. Methods: We used recent data from National Family Health Survey(NFHS) encompassing a total sample of 1,70,937 pregnant women for the period 2015–16. The percentage of women dropping out while seeking maternal health care is measured using descriptive statistics. While, the factors impeding the utilization of maternal health services is estimated using a Multinomial Logistic Regression Model, where dependent variable (CMHS) is defined as complete care, incomplete care and no care. Results: Only17% of pregnant women availed the utilisation of complete care and 83% either did not seek any care or dropped after seeking one or two services. For instance, it is found that 79% of women who registered for antenatal care services (ANC) did not avail the same adequately. An empirical investigation of determinants of inadequate utilization of CMHS revealed that factors like individual characteristics, for instance- access to media (RRR: 2.06) and mother's education play (RRR: 3.61) a vital role in the uptake of CMHS. It is also found that the interaction between wealth index and place of residence plays a pivotal role in seeking complete care. Lastly, the results revealed that male participation (RRR: 2.69) and contacting multi-purpose worker (MPW) (RRR: 2.33) are also at play. Conclusion: The study suggests that the major determinants of utilisation of CMHS are access to media, mother's education, affordability barriers and male participation. Hence, policy recommendations should be oriented towards strengthening these dimensions and the utilisation of adequate ANC has to be considered as the need of the hour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health policy interventions were expected to improve access to health care delivery, provide financial risk protection, besides reducing inequities that underlie geographic and socio-economic variation in population access to health care. This article examines whether health policy interventions and accelerated health investments in India during 2004–2018 could close the gap in inequity in health care utilization and access to public subsidy by different population groups. Did the poor and socio-economically vulnerable population gain from such government initiatives, compared to the rich and affluent sections of society? And whether the intended objective of improving equity between different regions of the country been achieved during the policy initiatives? This article attempts to assess and provide robust evidence in the Indian context. Methods: Employing Benefit-Incidence Analysis (BIA) framework, this paper advances earlier evidence by highlighting estimates of health care utilization, concentration and government subsidy by broader provider categories (public versus private) and across service levels (outpatient, inpatient, maternal, pre-and post-natal services). We used 2 waves of household surveys conducted by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) on health and morbidity. The period of analysis was chosen to represent policy interventions spanning 2004 (pre-policy) and 2018 (post-policy era). We present this evidence across three categories of Indian states, namely, high-focus states, high-focus north eastern states and non-focus states. Such categorization facilitates quantification of reform impact of policy level interventions across the three groups. Results: Utilisation of healthcare services, except outpatient care visits, accelerated significantly in 2018 from 2004. The difference in utilisation rates between poor and rich (between poorest 20% and richest 20%) had significantly declined during the same period. As far as concentration of healthcare is concerned, the Concentrate Index (CI) underlying inpatient care in public sector fell from 0.07 in 2004 to 0.05 in 2018, implying less pro-rich distribution. The CI in relation to pre-natal, institutional delivery and postnatal services in government facilities were pro-poor both in 2004 and 2018 in all 3 groups of states. The distribution of public subsidy underscoring curative services (inpatient and outpatient) remained pro-rich in 2004 but turned less pro-rich in 2018, measured by CIs which declined sharply across all groups of states for both outpatient (from 0.21 in 2004 to 0.16 in 2018) and inpatient (from 0.24 in 2004 to 0.14 in 2018) respectively. The CI for subsidy on prenatal services declined from approximately 0.01 in 2004 to 0.12 in 2018. In respect to post-natal care, similar results were observed, implying the subsidy on prenatal and post-natal services was overwhelmingly received by poor. The CI underscoring subsidy for institutional delivery although remained positive both in 2018 and 2004, but slightly increased from 0.17 in 2004 to 0.28 in 2018. Conclusions: Improvement in infrastructure and service provisioning through NHM route in the public facilities appears to have relatively benefited the poor. Yet they received a relatively smaller health subsidy than the rich when utilising inpatient and outpatient health services. Inequality continues to persist across all healthcare services in private health sector. Although the NHM remained committed to broader expansion of health care services, a singular focus on maternal and child health conditions especially in backward regions of the country has yielded desired results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]