Background Investment in human resources for health not only strengthens the health system, but also generates employment and contributes to economic growth. India can gain from enhanced investment in health workforce in multiple ways. This study in addition to presenting updated estimates on size and composition of health workforce, identifies areas of investment in health workforce in India. Methods We analyzed two sources of data: (i) National Health Workforce Account (NHWA) 2018 and (ii) Periodic Labour Force Survey 2017–2018 of the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO). Using the two sources, we collated comparable estimates of different categories of health workers in India, density of health workforce and skill-mix at the all India and state levels. Results The study estimated (from NHWA 2018) a total stock of 5.76 million health workers which included allopathic doctors (1.16 million), nurses/midwives (2.34 million), pharmacist (1.20 million), dentists (0.27 million), and traditional medical practitioner (AYUSH 0.79 million). However, the active health workforce size estimated (NSSO 2017–2018) is much lower (3.12 million) with allopathic doctors and nurses/midwives estimated as 0.80 million and 1.40 million, respectively. Stock density of doctor and nurses/midwives are 8.8 and 17.7, respectively, per 10,000 persons as per NHWA. However, active health workers’ density (estimated from NSSO) of doctor and nurses/midwives are estimated to be 6.1 and 10.6, respectively. The numbers further drop to 5.0 and 6.0, respectively, after accounting for the adequate qualifications. All these estimates are well below the WHO threshold of 44.5 doctor, nurses and midwives per 10,000 population. The results reflected highly skewed distribution of health workforce across states, rural–urban and public–private sectors. A substantial proportion of active health worker were found not adequately qualified on the one hand and on the other more than 20% of qualified health professionals are not active in labor markets. Conclusion India needs to invest in HRH for increasing the number of active health workers and also improve the skill-mix which requires investment in professional colleges and technical education. India also needs encouraging qualified health professionals to join the labor markets and additional trainings and skill building for already working but inadequately qualified health workers.

BACKGROUND: Investment in human resources for health not only strengthen the health system but also generates employment and contributes to economic growth. India can gain from enhanced investment in health workforce in multiple ways. This study in addition to presenting updated estimates on size and composition of health workforce, identifies areas of investment in health workforce in India.METHODS: We analyzed two sources of data: i) National Health Workforce Account (NHWA) 2018 and ii) Periodic Labour Force Survey 2017-18 of the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO). Using the two sources we collated comparable estimates of different categories of health workers in India, density of health workforce and skill-mix at the all India and state levels.RESULTS: The study estimated (from NHWA 2018) a total stock of 5.76 million health workers which included allopathic doctors (1.16 million), nurses/midwives (2.34 million), pharmacist (1.20 million), dentists (0.27 million), and traditional medical practitioner (AYUSH 0.79 million). However, the active health workforce size estimated (NSSO2017-18) is much lower (3.12 million) with allopathic doctors and nurses/midwives estimated as 0.80 million and 1.40 million respectively. Stock density of doctor and nurses/mid-wives are 8.8 and 17.7 respectively per 10,000 persons as per NHWA. However, active health workers’ density (estimated from NSSO) of doctor and nurses/mid-wives are estimated to be 6.1 and 10.6 respectively. The numbers further drop to 5.0 and 6.0 respectively after accounting for the adequate qualifications. All these estimates are well below the WHO threshold of 44.5 doctor, nurses and midwives per 10,000 population. The results reflected highly skewed distribution of health workforce across states, rural-urban and public-private sectors. A substantial proportion of active health worker were found not adequately qualified on the one hand and on the other more than 20% of qualified health professionals are not active in labour markets.CONCLUSION: India needs to invest in HRH for increasing the number of active health workers and also improve the skill-mix which requires investment in professional colleges and technical education. India also needs encouraging qualified health professionals to join the labour markets and additional trainings and skill building for already working but inadequately qualified health workers.

Background The purpose of this research is to generate new evidence on the economic consequences of multimorbidity on households in terms of out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures and their implications for catastrophic OOP expenditure. Methods We analyzed Social Consumption Health data from National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) 75th round conducted in the year 2017–2018 in India. The sample included 1,13,823 households (64,552 rural and 49,271 urban) through a multistage stratified random sampling process. Prevalence of multimorbidity and related OOP expenditure were estimated. Using Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) we estimated the mean OOP expenditure for individuals reporting multimorbidity and single morbidity for each episode of outpatient visits and hospital admission. We also estimated implications in terms of catastrophic OOP expenditure for households. Results Results suggest that outpatient OOP expenditure is invariably lower in the presence of multimorbidity as compared with single conditions of the selected Non-Communicable Diseases(NCDs) (overall, INR 720 [USD 11.3] for multimorbidity vs. INR 880 [USD 14.8] for single). In the case of hospitalization, the OOP expenditures were mostly higher for the same NCD conditions in the presence of multimorbidity as compared with single conditions, except for cancers and cardiovascular diseases. For cancers and cardiovascular, OOP expenditures in the presence of multimorbidity were lower by 39% and 14% respectively). Furthermore, around 46.7% (46.674—46.676) households reported incurring catastrophic spending (10% threshold) because of any NCD in the standalone disease scenario which rose to 63.3% (63.359–63.361) under the multimorbidity scenario. The catastrophic implications of cancer among individual diseases was the highest. Conclusions Multimorbidity leads to high and catastrophic OOP payments by households and treatment of high expenditure diseases like cancers and cardiovascular are under-financed by households in the presence of competing multimorbidity conditions. Multimorbidity should be considered as an integrated treatment strategy under the existing financial risk protection measures (Ayushman Bharat) to reduce the burden of household OOP expenditure at the country level.