The effect of social franchising on access to and quality of health services in low- and middle-income countries

Koehlmoos, TP; Gazi, Rukhsana; Ss, Hossain; Zaman, Khalequz

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd007136

Cited by 20 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The number of studies included in each review ranged from zero (Koehlmoos 2009; Kiwanuka 2011; Rutebemberwa 2014) to 45 (Fung 2008). The dates of the most recent searches in the reviews ranged from October 2004 in Gilbody 2005 to April 2014 in Grobler 2015.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews

Herrera

Lewin

Paulsen

et al. 2017

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGovernance arrangements include changes in rules or processes that determine authority and accountability for health policies, organisations, commercial products and health professionals, as well as the involvement of stakeholders in decision-making. Changes in governance arrangements can affect health and related goals in numerous ways, generally through changes in authority, accountability, openness, participation and coherence. A broad overview of the findings of systematic reviews can help policymakers, their technical support staff and other stakeholders to identify strategies for addressing problems and improving the governance of their health systems.ObjectivesTo provide an overview of the available evidence from up-to-date systematic reviews about the effects of governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries. Secondary objectives include identifying needs and priorities for future evaluations and systematic reviews on governance arrangements and informing refinements of the framework for governance arrangements outlined in the overview.MethodsWe searched Health Systems Evidence in November 2010 and PDQ Evidence up to 17 December 2016 for systematic reviews. We did not apply any date, language or publication status limitations in the searches. We included well-conducted systematic reviews of studies that assessed the effects of governance arrangements on patient outcomes (health and health behaviours), the quality or utilisation of healthcare services, resource use (health expenditures, healthcare provider costs, out-of-pocket payments, cost-effectiveness), healthcare provider outcomes (such as sick leave), or social outcomes (such as poverty, employment) and that were published after April 2005. We excluded reviews with limitations that were important enough to compromise the reliability of the findings of the review. Two overview authors independently screened reviews, extracted data and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We prepared SUPPORT Summaries for eligible reviews, including key messages, 'Summary of findings' tables (using GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence) and assessments of the relevance of findings to low-income countries.Main resultsWe identified 7272 systematic reviews and included 21 of them in this overview (19 primary reviews and 2 supplementary reviews). We focus here on the results of the 19 primary reviews, one of which had important methodological limitations. The other 18 were reliable (with only minor limitations).We grouped the governance arrangements addressed in the reviews into five categories: authority and accountability for health policies (three reviews); authority and accountability for organisations (two reviews); authority and accountability for commercial products (three reviews); authority and accountability for health professionals (seven reviews); and stakeholder involvement (four reviews).Overall, we found desirable effects for the following interventions on at least one outcome, with moderate- or high-certainty...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two reviews considered interventions related to authority and accountability for organisations (Koehlmoos 2009; Lagarde 2009). The review addressing the effects of social franchising, Koehlmoos 2009, did not identify any eligible studies, so we do not discuss it further below.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews

Herrera

Lewin

Paulsen

et al. 2017

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The public health sector in low- and middle-income countries is not always sufficiently well-equipped and financed to provide high quality health care that is accessible to all citizens (Basu 2012; Lagomarsino 2009). The consequence of this public sector failure has been a proliferation in private providers of healthcare services in most of the countries (Forsberg 2011; Levin 2011; Scott 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various strategies have been proposed for improving the functioning of the private for-profit health sector in order to increase the quality, availability, and affordability of health care for poor people in LMICs (Lagomarsino 2009; Levin 2011; Patouillard 2007; Waters 2003). These strategies include regulation, contracting-out, social marketing, franchising, use of vouchers, training, pay for performance, accreditation, and co-ordination.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, the creation of referral systems between the private for-profit and public sector and ensuring that health professionals in different health sectors understand their roles in disease management. The ultimate aim of government regulation, training, and co-ordination of the private for-profit health sector is to promote equity, better health outcomes, and financial protection (Lagomarsino 2009). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Public stewardship of private for-profit healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries

Wiysonge

Abdullahi

Ndze

et al. 2016

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Governments use different approaches to ensure that private for‐profit healthcare services meet certain quality standards. Such government guidance, referred to as public stewardship, encompasses government policies, regulatory mechanisms, and implementation strategies for ensuring accountability in the delivery of services. However, the effectiveness of these strategies in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) have not been the subject of a systematic review. Objectives To assess the effects of public sector regulation, training, or co‐ordination of the private for‐profit health sector in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Search methods For related systematic reviews, we searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) 2015, Issue 4; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) 2015, Issue 1; Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) 2015, Issue 1; all part of The Cochrane Library , and searched 28 April 2015. For primary studies, we searched MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, In‐Process & Other Non‐Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Daily and MEDLINE 1946 to Present, OvidSP (searched 16 June 2016); Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index 1987 to present, and Emerging Sources Citation Index 2015 to present, ISI Web of Science (searched 3 May 2016 for papers citing included studies); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2015, Issue 3, part of The Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register) (searched 28 April 2015); Embase 1980 to 2015 Week 17, OvidSP (searched 28 April 2015); Global Health 1973 to 2015 Week 16, OvidSP (searched 30 April 2015); WHOLIS, WHO (searched 30 April 2015); Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index 1975 to present, ISI Web of Science (searched 30 April 2015); Health Management, ProQuest (searched 22 November 2013). In addition, in April 2016, we searched the reference lists of relevant articles, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Clinicaltrials.gov, and various electronic databases of grey literature. Selection criteria Randomised trials, non‐randomised trials, interrupted time series studies, or controlled before‐after studies. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data, comparing their results and resolving discrepancies by consensus. We expressed study results as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where appropriate, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). We did not conduct meta‐analysis because of heterogeneity of interventions and study designs. Main results We identified 20,177 records, 50 of them potentially eligible. W...

show abstract

Effect of a multifaceted social franchising model on quality and coverage of maternal, newborn, and reproductive health-care services in Uttar Pradesh, India: a quasi-experimental study

Tougher

Dutt

Pereira

et al. 2018

The Lancet Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The effect of social franchising on access to and quality of health services in low- and middle-income countries

Cited by 20 publications

References 6 publications

Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews

Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews

Public stewardship of private for-profit healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries

Effect of a multifaceted social franchising model on quality and coverage of maternal, newborn, and reproductive health-care services in Uttar Pradesh, India: a quasi-experimental study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About