Search

Health insurance is one of the main financing mechanisms currently being used in low and middle-income countries to improve access to quality services. Tanzania has been running its National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) since 2001 and has recently undergone significant reforms. However, there is limited attention to the causal mechanisms through which NHIF improves service coverage and quality of care. This paper aims to use a system dynamics (qualitative) approach to understand NHIF causal pathways and feedback loops for improving service coverage and quality of care at the primary healthcare level in Tanzania. We used qualitative interviews with 32 stakeholders from national, regional, district, and health facility levels conducted between May to July 2021. Based on the main findings and themes generated from the interviews, causal mechanisms, and feedback loops were created. The majority of feedback loops in the CLDs were reinforcing cycles for improving service coverage among beneficiaries and the quality of care by providers, with different external factors affecting these two actions. Our main feedback loop shows that the NHIF plays a crucial role in providing additional financial resources to facilities to purchase essential medical commodities to deliver care. However, this cycle is often interrupted by reimbursement delays. Additionally, beneficiaries' perception that lower-level facilities have poorer quality of care has reinforced care seeking at higher-levels. This has decreased lower level facilities' ability to benefit from the insurance and improve their capacity to deliver quality care. Another key finding was that the NHIF funding has resulted in better services for insured populations compared to the uninsured. To increase quality of care, the NHIF may benefit from improving its reimbursement administrative processes, increasing the capacity of lower levels of care to benefit from the insurance and appropriately incentivizing providers for continuity of care. • The NHIF influences service coverage and quality in complex ways. • NHIF reimbursement is crucial for facilities and its delay affects inputs for quality. • Lower levels of care benefit less from NHIF. • Need to improve reimbursement process to enhance quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The MANAS trial evaluated the effectiveness of a lay counselor led collaborative stepped care intervention for Common Mental Disorders (CMD) in public and private sector primary care settings in Goa, India. This paper describes the qualitative findings of the experience of the intervention and its impact on health and psychosocial outcomes. Twenty four primary care facilities (12 public and private each) were randomized to provide either collaborative stepped care (CSC) or enhanced usual care (EUC) to adults who screen positive for CMDs. Participants were sampled purposively based on two criteria: gender and, in the CSC arm, adherence with the intervention. The qualitative study component involved two semi-structured interviews with participants of both arms (N = 115); the first interview within 2 months of recruitment and the second 6–8 months after recruitment. Data were collected between September 2007 and November 2009. More participants in the CSC than EUC arm reported relief from symptoms and an improvement in social functioning and positive impact on work and activities of daily life. The CSC participants attributed their improvement both to medication received from the doctors and the strategies suggested by the lay Health Counselors (HC). However, two key differences were observed in the results for the two types of facilities. First, the CSC participants in the public sector clinics were more likely to consider the HCs to be an important component of providing care who served as a link between patient and the doctor, provided them skills on stress management and helped in adherence to medication. Second, in the private sector, doctors performed roles similar to those of the HCs and participants in both arms placed much faith in the doctor who acted as a confidante and was perceived to understand the participant's health and context intimately. Lay counselors working in a CSC model have a positive effect on symptomatic relief, social functioning and satisfaction with care in patients with CMD attending primary care clinics although the impact, compared with usual care, is greater in the public sector. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Despite widespread acknowledgement of internet use for information about health, patients report not disclosing use of online health information in consultations. This paper compares patients' reported use of the internet with matched video recordings of consultations. The concepts of doctorability and epistemics are employed to consider similarities and differences between patients' reports in interviews and actions in the consultation. Data are drawn from the Harnessing Resources from the Internet study conducted in the UK. The data set consists of 281 video-recorded general practice consultations, with pre-consultation questionnaires completed by all patients, interviews with all 10 participating doctors and 28 selected patients. We focus on the 28 patient interviews and associated consultation recordings. A conversation analytic (CA) approach is used to systematically inspect both the interview and consultation data. In interviews patients presented use of the internet as associated with appropriate self-management and help-seeking. In consultations patients skilfully translated what they had found on the internet in order to provide grounds for the actions they sought. We conclude that patients translate and utilise what they have found on the internet to assert the doctorability of their presenting problems. Furthermore, patients design their talk in both interviews and consultations to accord with their understanding of the epistemic rights of both doctors and patients. Patients search the internet so they are informed about their medical problem, however they carefully manage disclosure of information to avoid disrupting the smooth running of medical interactions. • Patients seek information from the internet to support decisions to consult. • Patients seek information from the internet to support appropriate self-management. • Patients skilfully translate what they find on the internet to support requests. • Patients skilfully use the internet to invite action from their doctors. • Patients do not openly challenge the epistemic authority of the doctor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]