Perceived consequences of healthcare service decentralization on access, affordability and quality of care in Khartoum locality, Sudan

Abstract

Background Decentralization of healthcare services has been widely utilized, especially in developing countries, to improve the performance of healthcare systems by increasing the access and efficiency of service delivery. Experiences have been variable secondary to disparities in financial and human resources, system capacity and community engagement. Sudan is no exception and understanding the perceived effect of decentralization on access, affordability, and quality of care among stakeholders is crucial. Methods This was a mixed method, cross-sectional, explorative study that involved 418 household members among catchment areas and 40 healthcare providers of Ibrahim Malik Hospital (IBMH) and Khartoum Teaching Hospital (KTH). Data was collected through a structured survey and in-depth interviews from July–December 2015. Results Access, affordability and quality of healthcare services were all perceived as worse, compared to before decentralization was implemented. Reported affordability was found to be 53 and 55% before decentralization compared to 24 to 16% after decentralization, within KTH and IBMH catchment areas respectively, (p = 0.01). The quality of healthcare services was reported to have declined from 47 and 38% before decentralization to 38 and 28% after, in KTH and IBMH respectively (p = 0.02). Accessibility was found to be more limited, with services being accessible before decentralization approximately 59 and 52% of the time, compared to 41 and 30% after, in KTH and IBMH catchment areas respectively, (p = 0.01). Accessibility to healthcare was reported to have decreased secondary to facility closures, reverse transference of services, and low capacity of devolved facilities. Lastly, privatized services were reported as strengthened in response to this decentralization of healthcare. Conclusions The deterioration of access, affordability and quality of health services was experienced as the predominant perception among stakeholders after decentralization implementation. Our study results suggest there is an urgent need for a review of the current healthcare policies, structure and management within Sudan in order to provide evidence and insights regarding the impact of decentralization.

Impact of health system governance on healthcare quality in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review

“…Positive effects included reduced medication errors,61 increased screening of pregnant women for HIV,63 high patient satisfaction with the services61 62 64 65 68 and trustful relations between the providers and users 61 62. Negative effects were reduced access and affordability of services and client satisfaction,67 decreased utilisation of services and additional costs incurred in procuring the drugs from private providers 68…”

“…Decentralisation of decision-making, planning and implementation had varied impacts on QoC 65–68. In Sudan, decentralisation resulted in the deterioration of the overall QoC and utilisation of services.…”

“…In Sudan, decentralisation resulted in the deterioration of the overall QoC and utilisation of services. Availability and affordability of services were reduced, and inequity in service accessibility increased 67. In Nigeria, the low availability of equipment, drugs and supplies left many clients dissatisfied with the services.…”

“…Availability and affordability of services were reduced, and inequity in service accessibility increased. 67 In Nigeria, the low availability of equipment, drugs and supplies left many clients dissatisfied with the services. 68 Increased autonomy of hospitals in Indonesia for decentralised planning, budgeting, and management showed overall positive results in structural quality and client satisfaction.…”

The burden of chronic diseases and patients' preference for healthcare services among adult patients suffering from chronic diseases in Bangladesh

“…This finding is supported by previous studies which reported that distance to healthcare facilities was a potential barrier to accessing healthcare services in LMICs. 44 , 45 Patients' educational level, employment status and chronic comorbid conditions were also identified as significant determinants influencing their healthcare‐seeking preferences. This may be due to patients with chronic illnesses being more likely to prioritize treatment, management and quality of life over other life choices they may face.…”