Background: To quantify extent of catastrophic household health expenditures, determine factors influencing it and estimate Fairness in Financial Contribution (FFC) index in Georgia to establish the baseline for expected reforms and contribute to the design and fine-tuning of the major reforms in health care financing initiated by the government mid-2007.
Based on a household survey conducted in Tbilisi, Georgia, in 2000, this paper examines current patterns of health care-seeking behaviour and the extent of out-of-pocket payments. Results show that health care services are a financial burden and that private (out-of-pocket) payment creates financial barriers to accessing health services. Members of the poorest households are less likely to seek care than people from more affluent households, and devote a higher share of household monthly expenditure to health care. Households have adopted various strategies to overcome these financial barriers, but the strategies are likely to contribute to both declining economic status and worsening health outcomes. The paper provides an evidence base to help direct future policy reform in Georgia. Government needs to: (1) prioritize public financing of services for the poor, in particular through amending the Basic Benefit Package so that it better reflects the needs of the poor; (2) promote the quality and utilization of primary care services; (3) address the issue of rational drug use; and (4) consider mobilizing out-of-pocket payments on a pre-paid basis through formal or community-based risk pooling schemes.
BackgroundOne of the most common barriers to improving immunization coverage rates is human resources and its management. In the Republic of Georgia, a country where widespread health care reforms have taken place over the last decade, an intervention was recently implemented to strengthen performance of immunization programs. A range of measures were taken to ensure that immunization managers carry out their activities effectively through direct, personal contact on a regular basis to guide, support and assist designated health care facility staff to become more competent in their immunization work. The aim of this study was to document the effects of "supportive" supervision on the performance of the immunization program at the district(s) level in Georgia.MethodsA pre-post experimental research design is used for the quantitative evaluation. Data come from baseline and follow-up surveys of health care providers and immunization managers in 15 intervention and 15 control districts. These data were supplemented by focus group discussions amongst Centre of Public Health and health facility staff.ResultsThe results of the study suggest that the intervention package resulted in a number of expected improvements. Among immunization managers, the intervention independently contributed to improved knowledge of supportive supervision, and helped remove self-perceived barriers to supportive supervision such as availability of resources to supervisors, lack of a clear format for providing supportive supervision, and lack of recognition among providers of the importance of supportive supervision. The intervention independently contributed to relative improvements in district-level service delivery outcomes such as vaccine wastage factors and the DPT-3 immunization coverage rate. The clear positive improvement in all service delivery outcomes across both the intervention and control districts can be attributed to an overall improvement in the Georgian population's access to health care.ConclusionProvider-based interventions such as supportive supervision can have independent positive effects on immunization program indicators. Thus, it is recommended to implement supportive supervision within the framework of national immunization programs in Georgia and other countries in transition with similar institutional arrangements for health services organization.Abstract in RussianSee the full article online for a translation of this abstract in Russian.
BackgroundThere is large gap in mental illness treatment globally and potentially especially so in war-affected populations. The study aim was to examine health care utilization patterns for mental, behavioural and emotional problems among the war-affected adult population in the Republic of Georgia.MethodsA cross-sectional household survey was conducted among 3600 adults affected by 1990s and 2008 armed conflicts in Georgia. Service use was measured for the last 12 months for any mental, emotional or behavioural problems. TSQ, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 were used to measure current symptoms of PTSD, depression and anxiety. Descriptive and regression analyses were used.ResultsRespondents were predominantly female (65.0%), 35.8% were unemployed, and 56.0% covered by the government insurance scheme. From the total sample, 30.5% had symptoms of at least one current mental disorder. Among them, 39.0% sought care for mental problems, while 33.1% expressed facing barriers to accessing care and so did not seek care. General practitioners (29%) and neurologists (26%) were consulted by the majority of those with a current mental disorder who accessed services, while use of psychiatric services was far more limited. Pharmacotherapy was the predominant type of care (90%). Female gender (OR 1.50, 95% CI: 1.25, 1.80), middle-age (OR 1.83, 95% CI: 1.48, 2.26) and older-age (OR 1.62, 95% CI: 1.19, 2.21), possession of the state insurance coverage (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.30, 1.86), current PTSD symptoms (OR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.29, 1.90) and depression (OR 2.12, 95% CI: 1.70, 2.65) were associated with higher rates of health service utilization, while employed were less likely to use services (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55, 0.89).ConclusionsReducing financial access barriers and increasing awareness and access to local care required to help reduce the burden of mental disorders among conflict-affected persons in Georgia.
Background: In 2007 the Georgian government introduced a full state-subsidized Medical Insurance Program for the Poor (MIP) to provide better financial protection and improved access for socially and financially disadvantaged citizens. Studies evaluating MIP have noted its positive impact on financial protection, but find only a marginal impact on improved access. To better assess whether the effect of MIP varies according to different conditions, and to identify areas for improvement, we explored whether MIP differently affects utilization and costs among chronic patients compared to those with acute health needs. Methods: Data were collected from two cross-sectional nationally representative household surveys conducted in 2007 and in 2010 that examined health care utilization rates and expenditures. Approximately 3,200 households were interviewed from each wave of both studies using a standardized survey questionnaire. Differences in health care utilization and expenditures between chronic and acute patients with and without MIP insurance were evaluated, using coarsened exact matching techniques. Results: Among patients with chronic illnesses, MIP did not affect either health service utilization or expenditures for outpatient drugs and reduction in provider fees. For patients with acute illnesses MIP increased the odds (OR = 1.47) that they would use health services. MIP was also associated with a 20.16 Gel reduction in provider fees for those with acute illnesses (p = 0.003) and a 15.14 Gel reduction in outpatient drug expenditure (p = 0.013). Among those reporting a chronic illness with acute episode during the 30 days prior to the interview, MIP reduced expenditures on provider fees (B = -20.02 GEL) with marginal statistical significance. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the MIP may have improved utilization and reduce costs incurred by patients with acute health needs, while chronic patients marginally benefit only during exacerbation of their illnesses. This suggests that the MIP did not adequately address the needs of the aging Georgian population where chronic illnesses are prevalent. Increasing MIP benefits, particularly for patients with chronic illnesses, should receive priority attention if universal coverage objectives are to be achieved.
BackgroundWhilst there is recognition that the global burden of disease associated with mental health disorders is significant, the economic resources available, especially in Low and Middle Income Countries, are particularly scarce. Identifying the economic (system) and financial (individual) barriers to delivering mental health services and assessing the opportunities for reform can support the development of strategies for change.MethodsA mixed methods study was developed, which engaged with a range of stakeholders from mental health services, including key informants, service managers, healthcare professional and patients and their care-takers. Data generated from interviews and focus groups were analysed using an existing framework that outlines a range of economic and financial barriers to improving mental health practice. In addition, the study utilised health financing and programmatic data.ResultsThe analysis identified a variety of local economic barriers, including: the inhibition of the diversification of the mental health workforce and services due to inflexible resources; the variable and limited provision of services across the country; and the absence of mechanisms to assess the delivery and quality of existing services. The main financial barriers identified were related to out-of pocket payments for purchasing high quality medications and transportation to access mental health services.ConclusionsWhilst scarcity of financial resources exists in Georgia, as in many other countries, there are clear opportunities to improve the effectiveness of the current mental health programme. Addressing system-wide barriers could enable the delivery of services that aim to meet the needs of patients. The use of existing data to assess the implementation of the mental health programme offers opportunities to benchmark and improve services and to support the appropriate commissioning and reconfiguration of services.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-2912-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
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.