Search

The first Mohalla or Community clinic was set up in July 2015 in Delhi, India. Four hundred and eighty such clinics were set up in Delhi, since then. This review was conducted to synthesize evidence on access, utilization, functioning, and performance of Mohalla clinics. A desk review of secondary data from published research papers and reports was conducted initially from February–May 2020 and updated in August 2020. Eleven studies were included in the final analysis. Studies have documented that more than half to two-third of beneficiaries at these clinics were women, elderly, poor, and with school education up to primary level. One-third to two-third of all beneficiaries had come to the government primary care facility for the first time. A majority who attended clinics lived within 10 min of walking distances. There was high rate of satisfaction (around 90%) with overall services, doctor–patient interaction time and the people were willing to return for future health needs. Most beneficiaries received consultations, medicines, and diagnostics at no cost. A few challenges such as dispensing of medicines for shorter duration, lack of awareness about the exact location of the clinics, and services available among target beneficiaries, and the incomplete records maintenance and reporting system at facilities were identified. Mohalla Clinics of Delhi ensured continuity of primary care and laboratory services during COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. In summary, Mohalla Clinics have made primary care accessible and affordable to under-served population (thus, addressed inequities) and brought attention of policy makers on strengthening and investing on health services. The external evaluations and assessments on the performance of these clinics, with robust methodology are needed. The services through these clinics should be expanded to deliver comprehensive package of primary healthcare with inclusion of preventive, promotive, community outreach, and other public health services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The National Health Policy, 2017, suggests pluralism in health care with the integrated delivery of AYUSH and allopathic care at public facilities. Information on unit cost of outpatient visits for both types of care at public facilities is useful to guide the policies on health-care delivery. Methods: The costs in 2019–20 were estimated for each type of care at allopathic urban primary health center (UPHC) and AYUSH facilities using top-down methodology and adding out-of-pocket expenditures (OOPE) incurred to reflect true costs. Data from national health survey, annual government budgets, and reports were used. Results: The average cost of an outpatient visit for allopathic care was ₹325 at a UPHC and ₹189 in a homeopathic dispensary and ₹692 in an Ayurvedic dispensary. While OOPE per visit at UPHC was ₹177, no OOPE was incurred at AYUSH facilities. The government expenditure per visit for allopathic care at UPHC at ₹148 was the lowest compared to any type of AYUSH care. The cost per facility for allopathic UPHC was higher than both Ayurvedic and homeopathic dispensaries. Unani dispensaries were least cost-effective, both in terms of cost per visit and cost per facility. Conclusion: Costs per visit at a facility are impacted by footfalls. For Ayurveda, despite lower facility costs as compared to UPHC, per visit costs were higher due to low utilization. Improving evidence-based utilization of AYUSH care is critical for the success of the government policy of mainstreaming AYUSH care at low cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The COVID-19 outbreak poses a global crisis in health care delivery system, including habilitation and rehabilitation services. In this study, we shared our experiences on telerehabilitation services established primarily for students with visual disabilities (SwVD) amidst COVID-19 pandemic and its outputs. Methods: Following the lockdown declared on March 23, 2020, the rehabilitative team of a tertiary eye center in north India received information that many visually challenged students (VCS) were stranded in schools for the blind in Delhi, and feeling with anxiety and panic in absence of teachers. Shortly, the room for vision rehabilitation clinic was set-up for telefacilities. The intended services were explained while disseminating the mobile numbers. A semi-structured questionnaire consisting of closed and open-ended was developed to record COVID-19 knowledge and concerns. Inductive content analysis was used to report the qualitative information. Results: As of June 30, 2020, a total of 492 clients contacted the team, with maximum from Delhi (41.5%), and predominantly males (78.8%). Around 80.3% of callers were VCS with age range of 11 to 30 years. The two most frequently encountered health needs were itching in eyes (36.1%) and headache (29%). Television news was the most used medium among callers to get COVID-19 information. Cough is a less frequently known mode of transmission (28%), similarly handwashing as a less known for prevention (17.2%). Eight concerns were recorded based on qualitative data analysis. Conclusion: Telerehabilitation provides valuable insights and has the potential to address various concerns, uncertainty, anxiety, and fear among VCS during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]