BackgroundNon-communicable diseases (NCD) pose challenges to Cambodia’s health system. Medicines for NCD are on the National Essential Medicines List but no clinical guidelines support their utilization. Two social health protection schemes aimed at the informal sector population exist (Health Equity Funds and Insurance) together with two disease-specific interventions (a Peer Educator Network and Chronic Diseases Clinics) targeted at NCD patients. This study examines performance of these various schemes in relation to NCD.MethodsCross-sectional household survey among 709 individuals self-reporting diabetes and/or hypertension in three geographical locations in rural Cambodia using a structured questionnaire investigating diagnostic and treatment pathways, health seeking behaviour, health expenditures, and financial coping mechanisms.ResultsTwo third of respondents with NCD were female and 55% did not belong to any scheme. The majority (59%) were diagnosed in the private sector and only 56% were on allopathic treatment that was mainly sought in the private sector (49%). Outpatient treatment cost was higher in the private sector and when using multiple providers of care. The majority were indebted, 11% due to health-related expenses. Contrary to social health protection schemes, disease-specific interventions offered better access to allopathic treatment and provided medicines in accordance with NEML.ConclusionThe benefit packages of existing social health protection schemes and services in the public health sector should be adjusted to cater for the needs of people living with NCD in rural Cambodia. Initiatives that offer active disease management strategies and promote patients and community participation appear more successful in increasing treatment adherence and decreasing the risk of financial hardship.

In spite of all efforts to build national health services, health systems of many low-income countries are today highly pluralistic. Households use a vast range of public and private health care providers, many of whom are not controlled by national health authorities. Experts have called on Ministries of Health to re-establish themselves as stewards of the entire health system. Modern stewardship will require national and decentralized health authorities to have an overall view of their pluralistic health system, especially of the components outside the public sector. Little guidance has been provided so far on how to develop such a view. In this paper, we explore whether household surveys could be a source of information. The study builds on secondary data analysis of a household survey carried out in three health districts in rural Cambodia and of two national surveys. Cambodia is indeed an interesting case, as massive efforts by donors in favour of the public sector go hand in hand with a dominant role of the private sector in the provision of health care services. The study confirms that the health care sector in Cambodia is now highly pluralistic, and that the great majority of health seeking behaviour takes place outside the public health system. Our analysis of the survey also shows that the disaffection of the population with public health facilities varies across places, socio-economic groups and health problems. We illustrate how such knowledge could allow stewards to better identify challenges for existing or future health policies. We argue that a whole research programme on the composition of pluralistic health systems still needs to be developed. We identify some challenges and opportunities.

BackgroundThere is substantial evidence that ill-health is a major cause of impoverishment in developing countries. Major illnesses can have a serious economic impact on poor households through treatment costs and income loss. However, available methods for measuring the impact of ill-health on household welfare display several shortcomings and new methods are thus needed. To understand the potential complex impact of major illnesses on household livelihoods, a study on poverty and illness was conducted in rural Cambodia, as part of an international comparative research project. A cross-sectional survey was performed to identify households affected by major illness for further in-depth interviews.Methodology and Principal Findings5,975 households in three rural health districts were randomly selected through a two-stage cluster sampling and interviewed. 27% of the households reported at least one member with a serious illness in the year preceding the survey and 15% of the household members reported suffering from at least one serious illness. The most reported conditions include common tropical infectious diseases, chronic diseases (notably hypertension and heart diseases) and road traffic accidents. Such conditions were particularly concentrated among the poor, children under five, women, and the elderly. Poor women often reported complications related to pregnancy and delivery as serious illnesses.Conclusions and SignificanceDespite some methodological limitations, this study provides new information on the frequency of self-reported serious illnesses among the rural Cambodia's population, which serves as a basis for further in-depth investigation on ‘major illnesses’ and their economic consequences on poor households. This can in turn help policy makers to formulate appropriate interventions to protect the poor from the financial burden associated with ill-health. Our findings suggest that every year a considerable proportion of rural population in Cambodia, especially the poor and vulnerable, are affected by serious illnesses, both communicable and non-communicable diseases.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract Public providers have no financial incentive to respect their legal obligation to exempt the poor from user fees. Health Equity Funds (HEFs) aim to make exemptions effective by giving NGOs responsibility for assessing eligibility and compensating providers for lost revenue. We use the geographic spread of HEFs in Cambodia to identify their impact on out-of-pocket (OOP) payments. Among households with some OOP payment, HEFs reduce the amount by 29%, on average. The effect is larger for households that are poorer, mainly use public health care and live closer to a district hospital. HEFs are more effective in reducing OOP payments when they are operated by a NGO, rather than the government, and when they operate in conjunction with the contracting of public health services. HEFs reduce households' healthrelated debt by around 25%, on average. There is no significant impact on non-medical consumption and health care utilisation. Terms of use: Documents inJEL Classification: H42, H51, I18

Financially stricken Cambodian patients with diabetes and HIV/AIDS typically encounter multiple, serious barriers to effective care. This process may extend over many years and involve numerous rounds of diagnosis and treatment as the disease progresses from initial symptoms to longer term complications. Living with both the impact of the disease and this ongoing struggle for care can severely disrupt the everyday life of both sufferers and their families.Our retrospective study adopted qualitative research methods to collect data from HIV/AIDS and diabetic patients enrolled and not enrolled in treatment programs at varying institutions in urban and rural settings. Using purposive sampling techniques, a total of 25 HIV/AIDS and 45 diabetic patients were recruited. Semi-structured and open-ended interviews were used to collect information on patient experiences of different phases in the on-going process of seeking care and treatment. The findings indicate that both HIV/AIDS and diabetic patients encounter multiple supply-and demand-side barriers to care at different stages of their illness. More strikingly, our research findings suggest that supply-side barriers, for example rationing systems or targeting strategies that limit access to free treatment or social assistance, are substantially higher for diabetic patients. This perceived inequity had a profound impact on diabetic patients to the extent that some "wished they had HIV/AIDS". These findings suggest that there is an urgent need to widen the focus of health care to address the substantial and increasing burden of disease resulting from diabetes and other serious chronic disorders in Cambodia and many other low/middle income countries.