2004
DOI: 10.1080/00083968.2004.10751279
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Privatisation des soins de santé en Afrique: Une solution miracle au bénéfice (et au détriment) de qui?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 3 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From some developing countries health sector decentralization experiences, it emerges that: (i) not differentiating between approaches in terms of strategic and commercial services and those in terms of social services has led to reforms oriented towards a market approach rather than a social approach to services (in Viet Nam) with negative effects on the universality of access to care, equity and efficiency [14] with the final consequence that poor health cost was higher than that of the rich; ii) the opening up to the private sector has increased the number of patients to this sector by 60% over a period of 10 years, still in the Vietnamese case, with a surge in demand for pharmacies, with a consequence on the increase of self-medication (mainly the poorer strata, less covered by health insurance) and drug resistance risk [15]; iii) decentralization has generated three types of informal care markets in Africa: traditional medicine, street drug market and an informal health insurance market born from tontines [16]. In addition, there is a notable increase in private forprofit structures in urban areas, as rural areas are not able to ensure their profitability [17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From some developing countries health sector decentralization experiences, it emerges that: (i) not differentiating between approaches in terms of strategic and commercial services and those in terms of social services has led to reforms oriented towards a market approach rather than a social approach to services (in Viet Nam) with negative effects on the universality of access to care, equity and efficiency [14] with the final consequence that poor health cost was higher than that of the rich; ii) the opening up to the private sector has increased the number of patients to this sector by 60% over a period of 10 years, still in the Vietnamese case, with a surge in demand for pharmacies, with a consequence on the increase of self-medication (mainly the poorer strata, less covered by health insurance) and drug resistance risk [15]; iii) decentralization has generated three types of informal care markets in Africa: traditional medicine, street drug market and an informal health insurance market born from tontines [16]. In addition, there is a notable increase in private forprofit structures in urban areas, as rural areas are not able to ensure their profitability [17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%