IntroductionHealthcare systems in Africa suffer from neglect and underfunding, leading to severe challenges across the six World Health Organization (WHO) pillars of healthcare delivery. We conducted this study to identify the principal challenges in the health sector in Africa and their solutions for evidence-based decisions, policy development and program prioritization.MethodsThe study was conducted as part of a recent African Epidemiological Association Meeting in Maputo, Mozambique with participants drawn from 11 African countries, Cuba, Portugal and the United Kingdom. Participants were divided into 10 groups, consisting of 7 to 10 persons each. Brainstorming approaches were used in a structured, modified nominal group process exercise to identify key challenges and strategies to mitigate healthcare service challenges in Africa. Identified challenges and solutions were prioritised by ranking 1–5, with 1 most important and 5 being least important.ResultsThe first three challenges identified were inadequate human resources (34.29%), inadequate budgetary allocation to health (30%) and poor leadership and management (8.45%). The leading solutions suggested included training and capacity building for health workers (29.69%), increase budgetary allocation to health (20.31%) and advocacy for political support and commitment (12.31%).ConclusionThe underdeveloped healthcare systems in Africa need radical solutions with innovative thought to break the current impasse in service delivery. For example, public-private initiatives should be sought, where multinational companies extracting resources from Africa might be encouraged to plough some of the profits back into healthcare for the communities providing the workforce for their commercial activities. Most problems and their solutions lie within human resources, budget allocation and management. These should be accorded the highest priority for better health outcomes.

Economic status and place of residence amongst other factors matter in peoples' WTP for CBHI membership. Consumer awareness has to be created about the benefits of CBHI, especially in rural areas, and the amount to be paid has to be augmented with other means of financing (e.g. government and/or donor subsidies) to ensure success and sustainability of CBHI schemes.

The anti-retroviral (ARV) treatment programme in Nigeria is delivered through selected teaching and mission hospitals at a free/subsidized rate. The government aims to scale up ARV treatment in the country. However, non-adherence to ARV medication can lead to viral resistance, treatment failure, toxicities and waste of financial resources. This study examined the factors responsible for non-adherence to free/subsidized ARV treatment in south-east Nigeria. The study was cross-sectional and descriptive. Information was collected from 174 patients selected by simple random sampling from the register of all patients who had been on anti-retroviral therapy (ART) for at least 12 months at the beginning of the study period. Patients were identified during their clinic visits. Information on their socio-demographic profile, ARV treatment and determinants of non-adherence to ARV treatment was obtained from those who gave consent, using pre-tested interviewer-administered questionnaires. All patients clearly understood the need to take ARV drugs throughout their lives, and what the costs entailed. They understood the need for periodic testing, the probability that complications would develop, cost of transportation to treatment site and the daily treatment regimen. Seventy-five per cent of respondents were not adhering fully to their drug regimen; the mean number of days that respondents had been off drugs was 3.57 days the preceding month. Reasons for non-adherence included: physical discomfort (side effects); non-availability of drugs at treatment site; forgetting to carry drugs during the day; fear of social rejection; treatment being a reminder of HIV status; and selling of own drugs to those unable to enrol in the projects. Being female, under 35 years, single, and having higher educational status were significantly associated with non-adherence. It is important that policy makers and programme managers address the factors responsible for non-adherence when scaling up subsidized ARV treatment in Nigeria and other parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

BackgroundThe introduction of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) has improved the diagnosis and treatment of malaria. However, any successful control of malaria will depend on socio-economic factors that influence its management in the community. Willingness to pay (WTP) is important because consumer responses to prices will influence utilization of services and revenues collected. Also the consumer's attitude can influence monetary valuation with respect to different conditions ex post and ex ante.MethodsWTP for RDT for Malaria was assessed by the contingent valuation method using a bidding game approach in rural and urban communities in southeast Nigeria. The ex post WTP was assessed at the health centers on 618 patients immediately following diagnosis of malaria with RDT and the ex ante WTP was assessed by household interviews on 1020 householders with a prior history of malaria.ResultsFor the ex ante WTP, 51% of the respondents in urban and 24.7% in rural areas were willing to pay for RDT. The mean WTP (235.49 naira) in urban is higher than WTP (182.05 Naira) in rural areas. For the ex post WTP, 89 and 90.7% of the respondents in urban and rural areas respectively were WTP. The mean WTP (372.30 naira) in urban is also higher than (296.28 naira) in rural areas. For the ex post scenario, the lower two Social Economic Status (SES) quartiles were more willing to pay and the mean WTP is higher than the higher two SES while in the ex ante scenario, the higher two SES quartiles were more WTP and with a higher WTP than the lower two SES quartile. Ex ante and ex post WTP were directly dependent on costs.ConclusionThe ex post WTP is higher than the ex ante WTP and both are greater than the current cost of RDTs. Urban dwellers were more willing to pay than the rural dwellers. The mean WTP should be considered when designing suitable financial strategies for making RDTs available to communities.

BackgroundGetting research into policy and practice (GRIPP) is a process of going from research evidence to decisions and action. To integrate research findings into the policy making process and to communicate research findings to policymakers is a key challenge world-wide. This paper reports the experiences of a research group in a Nigerian university when seeking to ‘do’ GRIPP, and the important features and challenges of this process within the African context.MethodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with nine purposively selected policy makers in various organizations and six researchers from the universities and research institute in a Nigerian who had been involved in 15 selected joint studies/projects with Health Policy Research Group (HPRG). The interviews explored their understanding and experience of the methods and processes used by the HPRG to generate research questions and research results; their involvement in the process and whether the methods were perceived as effective in relation to influencing policy and practice and factors that influenced the uptake of research results.ResultsThe results are represented in a model with the four GRIPP strategies found: i) stakeholders’ request for evidence to support the use of certain strategies or to scale up health interventions; ii) policymakers and stakeholders seeking evidence from researchers; iii) involving stakeholders in designing research objectives and throughout the research process; and iv) facilitating policy maker-researcher engagement in finding best ways of using research findings to influence policy and practice and to actively disseminate research findings to relevant stakeholders and policymakers.The challenges to research utilization in health policy found were to address the capacity of policy makers to demand and to uptake research, the communication gap between researchers, donors and policymakers, the management of the political process of GRIPP, the lack of willingness of some policy makers to use research, the limited research funding and the resistance to change.ConclusionsCountry based Health Policy and Systems Research groups can influence domestic policy makers if appropriate strategies are employed. The model presented gives some direction to potential strategies for getting research into policy and practice in the health care sector in Nigeria and elsewhere.

BackgroundMalaria is one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in Nigeria. It is not known how user fees introduced under the Bamako Initiative (BI) system affect healthcare seeking among different socio-economic groups in Nigeria for diagnosis and treatment of malaria. Reliable information is needed to initiate new policy thrusts to protect the poor from the adverse effect of user fees.MethodsStructured questionnaires were used to collect information from 1594 female household primary care givers or household head on their socio-economic and demographic status and use of malaria diagnosis and treatment services. Principal components analysis was used to create a socio-economic status index which was decomposed into quartiles and chi-square for trends was used to calculate for any statistical difference.ResultsThe study showed that self diagnosis was the commonest form of diagnosis by the respondents. This was followed by diagnosis through laboratory tests, community health workers, family members and traditional healers. The initial choice of care for malaria was a visit to the patent medicine dealers for most respondents. This was followed by visit to the government hospitals, the BI health centres, traditional medicine healers, private clinics, community health workers and does nothing at home. Furthermore, the private health facilities were the initial choice of treatment for the majority with a decline among those choosing them as a second source of care and an increase in the utilization of public health facilities as a second choice of care. Self diagnosis was practiced more by the poorer households while the least poor used the patent medicine dealers and community health workers less often for diagnosis of malaria. The least poor groups had a higher probability of seeking treatment at the BI health centres (creating equity problem in BI), hospitals, and private clinics and in using laboratory procedures. The least poor also used the patent medicine dealers and community health workers less often for the treatment of malaria. The richer households complained more about poor staff attitude and lack of drugs as their reasons for not attending the BI health centres. The factors that encourage people to use services in BI health centres were availability of good services, proximity of the centres to the homes and polite health workers.ConclusionsFactors deterring people from using BI centres should be eliminated. The use of laboratory services for the diagnosis of malaria by the poor should be encouraged through appropriate information, education and communication which at the long run will be more cost effective and cost saving for them while devising means of reducing the equity gap created. This could be done by granting a properly worked out and implemented fee exemptions to the poor or completely abolishing user fees for the diagnosis and treatment of malaria in BI health centres.

BackgroundMalaria is the number one public health problem in Nigeria, responsible for about 30% of deaths in under-fives and 25% of deaths in infants and 11% maternal mortality. This study estimated the economic burden of malaria in Nigeria using the cost of illness approach.MethodsA cross-sectional study was undertaken in two malaria holo-endemic communities in Nigeria, involving both community and hospital based surveys. A random sample of 500 households was interviewed using interviewer administered questionnaire. In addition, 125 exit interviews for inpatient department stays (IPD) and outpatient department visits (OPD) were conducted and these were complemented with data abstraction from 125 patient records.ResultsFrom the household survey, over half of the households (57.6%) had an episode of malaria within one month to the date of the interview. The average household expenditure per case was 12.57US$ and 23.20US$ for OPD and IPD respectively. Indirect consumer costs of treatment were higher than direct consumer medical costs. From a health system perspective, the recurrent provider costs per case was 30.42 US$ and 48.02 US$ for OPD and IPD while non recurrent provider costs were 133.07US$ and 1857.15US$ for OPD and IPD. The mode of payment was mainly through out-of-pocket spending (OOPS).ConclusionPrivate expenditure on treatment of malaria constitutes a high economic burden to households and to the health system. Removal of user fees and interventions that will decrease the use of OOPS for treatment of malaria will significantly decrease the economic burden of malaria to both households and the health system.

ObjectiveThere is limited evidence about levels of socio-economic and other differences in catastrophic health spending in Nigeria and in many sub-Saharan African countries. The study estimated the level of catastrophic healthcare expenditures for different healthcare services and facilities and their distribution across socioeconomic status (SES) groups.MethodsThe study took place in four Local Government Areas in southeast Nigeria. Data were collected using interviewer-administered questionnaires administered to 4873 households. Catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) were measured using a threshold of 40% of monthly non-food expenditure. We examined both total monthly health expenditure and disaggregated expenditure by source and type of care.ResultsThe average total household health expenditure per month was 2354 Naira ($19.6). For outpatient services, average monthly expenditure was 1809 Naira ($15.1), whilst for inpatient services it was 610 Naira ($5.1). Higher health expenditures were incurred by urban residents and the better-off SES groups. Overall, 27% of households incurred CHE, higher for poorer socioeconomic groups and for rural residents. Only 1.0% of households had a member that was enrolled in a health insurance scheme.ConclusionThe worse-off households (the poorest SES and rural dwellers) experienced the highest burden of health expenditure. There was almost a complete lack of financial risk protection. Health reform mechanisms are needed to ensure universal coverage with financial risk protection mechanisms.