Assessing the use of an essential health package in a sector wide approach in Malawi

Abstract

BackgroundThe sector wide approach (SWAp) used in many developing countries is difficult to assess. One way is to consider the essential health package (EHP) which is commonly the vehicle for a SWAp's policies and plans. It is not possible to measure the impact of an EHP by measuring health outcomes in countries such as Malawi. But it is possible to assess the choice of interventions and their delivery in terms of coverage. This paper describes an attempt to assess the Malawi SWAp through its EHP using these available measures of technical efficiency.MethodsA burden of disease model was used to identify the priority diseases and their estimated incidence. Data from the health management information system (HMIS) were used to measure the coverage of these interventions. A review of the cost-effectiveness of the chosen and potential interventions was undertaken to assess the appropriateness of each intervention used in the EHP. Expenditure data were used to assess the level of funding of the EHP.Results33 of the 55 EHP interventions were found to be potentially cost-effective (<$150/DALY), 12 were not so cost-effective (>$150/DALY) and cost-effective estimates were not available for ten. 15 potential interventions, which were cost-effective and tackling one of the top 20 ranked diseases, were identified.Provision had increased in nearly all EHP services over the period of the SWAp. The rates of out patient attendances and inpatient days per 1000 population had both increased from 929 attendances in 2002/3 to 1135 in 2007/08 and from 124 inpatient days in 2002/03 to 179 in 2007/08.However, by 2007/08 the mean gap between what was required and what was provided was 0.68 of the estimated need. Two services involving the treatment of malaria were overprovided, but the majority were underprovided, with some such as maternity care providing less than half of what was required.The EHP was under-funded throughout the period covering on average 57% of necessary costs. By 2007/08 the funding paid by SWAp partners including the government of Malawi to fund the EHP was at US$13.5 per capita per annum, which was almost half of the revised EHP estimated required expenditure per capita per annum.DiscussionThe SWAp had invested in some very cost-effective health interventions. In terms of numbers of patients treated, the EHP had delivered two thirds of the services required. This was despite serious under-funding of the EHP, an increase in the population and shortage of staff.ConclusionsThe identification of interventions of proven effectiveness and good value for money and earmarked funding through a SWAp process can produce measurable improvement in health service delivery at extremely low cost.

Gaps in universal health coverage in Malawi: A qualitative study in rural communities

“…This evidence has been reported within contexts where direct out-of-pocket payments were previously implemented in the public health sector [9,42-44]. This important financial protection gap was absent in our findings and the findings of earlier published studies within Malawi [26,30,35]. This possibly suggests that informal payments within the public sector are more likely to arise within contexts where free care or exemption systems exist parallel to out-of-pocket payments, rather than in a system like Malawi which has never relied on user fees after independence [45].…”

“…The EHP includes about 55 interventions which reflect the main morbidity and mortality patterns of the country (see Table 1) [25,26]. The EHP is funded from general tax revenue and donor funds.…”

The economic burden of chronic non-communicable diseases in rural Malawi: an observational study

“…Government funded health provision consists of a combination of tax-based and donor financing to ensure that services included in the Essential Health Package (EHP) are provided free of charge at point of use, at either public or contracted private not-for-profit facilities. The EHP is meant as a measure to advance progress towards universal coverage and as such includes most priority health interventions targeting the major causes of disease burden in the country [22]. In 2010, the government expanded the EHP to also include health interventions targeting the most common CNCDs, such as screening, prevention, and treatment of cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and certain cancers (breast cancer, cervical cancer) [21].…”

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of potential responses to future high levels of transmitted HIV drug resistance in antiretroviral drug-naive populations beginning treatment: modelling study and economic analysis

“…21 For more poorly resourced health systems in sub-Saharan Africa, a cost-effectiveness threshold of $500 or lower is probably realistic, since many interventions offering health gains at this amount or less remain unfunded. 14,22 We did several sensitivity analyses around costing of viral load, resistance testing, and second-line regimens of boosted protease inhibitors.…”