User fee reduction and removal policies have been the object of extensive research, but little rigorous evidence exists on their sustained effects in relation to use of delivery care services, and no evidence exists on the effects of partial reduction compared with full removal of user fees. We aimed to fill these knowledge gaps by assessing sustained effects of both partial reduction and complete removal of user fees on utilization of facility-based delivery. Our study took place in four districts in the Sahel region of Burkina Faso, where the national user fee reduction policy (SONU) launched in 2007 (lowering fees at point of use by 80%) co-existed with a user fee removal pilot launched in 2008. We used Health Management Information System data to construct a controlled interrupted time-series analysis and examine both immediate and sustained effects of SONU and the pilot from January 2004 to December 2014. We found that both SONU and the pilot led to a sustained increase in the use of facility-based delivery. SONU produced an accumulative increase of 31.4% (P < 0.01) over 8 years in the four study districts. The pilot further enhanced utilization and produced an additional increase of 23.2% (P < 0.001) over 6 years. These increasing trends did not continue to reach full coverage, i.e. ensuring that all women had a facility-based delivery. Instead, they stabilized 3 years and 4 years after the onset of SONU and the pilot, respectively. Our study provides further evidence that user fee reduction and removal policies are effective in increasing service use in the long term. However, they alone are not sufficient to achieve full coverage. This calls for the need to implement additional measures, targeting for instance geographical barriers and knowledge gaps, to achieve the target of all women delivering in the presence of a skilled attendant.
BackgroundThe low quality of healthcare and the presence of user fees in Burkina Faso contribute to low utilization of healthcare and elevated levels of mortality. To improve access to high-quality healthcare and equity, national authorities are testing different intervention arms that combine performance-based financing with community-based health insurance and pro-poor targeting. There is a need to evaluate the implementation of these unique approaches. We developed a research protocol to analyze the conditions that led to the emergence of these intervention arms, the fidelity between the activities initially planned and those conducted, the implementation and adaptation processes, the sustainability of the interventions, the possibilities for scaling them up, and their ethical implications.Methods/DesignThe study adopts a longitudinal multiple case study design with several embedded levels of analyses. To represent the diversity of contexts where the intervention arms are carried out, we will select three districts. Within districts, we will select both primary healthcare centers (n =18) representing different intervention arms and the district or regional hospital (n =3). We will select contrasted cases in relation to their initial performance (good, fair, poor). Over a period of 18 months, we will use quantitative and qualitative data collection and analytical tools to study these cases including in-depth interviews, participatory observation, research diaries, and questionnaires. We will give more weight to qualitative methods compared to quantitative methods.DiscussionPerformance-based financing is expanding rapidly across low- and middle-income countries. The results of this study will enable researchers and decision makers to gain a better understanding of the factors that can influence the implementation and the sustainability of complex interventions aiming to increase healthcare quality as well as equity.
Objectives Increasing financial access to healthcare is proposed to being essential for improving child health outcomes, but the available evidence on the relationship between increased access and health remains scarce. Four years after its launch, we evaluated the contextual effect of user fee removal intervention on the probability of an illness occurring and the likelihood of using health services among children under 5. We also explored the potential effect on the inequality in healthcare access. Methods We used a comparative cross-sectional design based upon household survey data collected years after the intervention onset in one intervention and one comparison district. Propensity scores weighting was used to achieve balance on covariates between the two districts, which was followed by logistic multilevel modelling to estimate average marginal effects (AME). Results We estimated that there was not a significant difference in the reduced probability of an illness occurring in the intervention district compared to the non-intervention district [AME 4.4; 95% CI 1.0–9.8)]. However, the probability of using health services was 17.2% (95% CI 15.0–26.6) higher among children living in the intervention district relative to the comparison district, which rose to 20.7% (95% CI 9.9–31.5) for severe illness episodes. We detected no significant differences in the probability of health services use according to socio-economic status [χ 2 (5) = 12.90, p = 0.61]. Conclusions for Practice In our study, we found that user fee removal led to a significant increase in the use of health services in the longer term, but it is not adequate by itself to reduce the risk of illness occurrence and socioeconomic inequities in the use of health services.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.