Search

Background: Kerala has initiated many Universal Health Coverage (UHC) reforms in the last decade. The Aardram Mission launched in 2017 stands out owing to its scope, objectives, and commitments for strengthening Primary Health Care (PHC) in the State. The current study proposes to explore access and financial protection through the lens of equity in Kerala especially in the context of major UHC reforms carried out during the last decade. This paper will also highlight the key lessons from Kerala's approach towards UHC and health systems strengthening through a political economy approach. Methods: Data from the Kerala state sample of 75th Round (2017-18) National Sample Survey is used for this study. Comparison is also drawn from the 71st Round Sample Survey, 2014, to measure the state's progress in terms of access and financial protection. Logistic regression was used for the calculation. The findings were further explored through a political economy approach. Results: The share of public facilities for outpatient care is 47.5%, which is a significant increase from 34.0% (in 2014) in the state. The share of public sector for out-patient care has increased for the lower socio-economic population in the state. The share of public sector for in-patient care has also increased to 37.3% in 2017-18 from 33.9% in 2014, but not to the extent as the increase shown in outpatient care. The average out-of-pocket-expenditure during hospitalization has increased more in private facilities as compared to public for both outpatient care and hospitalization. Conclusions: Overall increase in the share of public facilities for both outpatient care and hospitalization is indicative of the enhanced trust among the people at large of the public healthcare delivery system in Kerala, post the launch of UHC reforms in the State. The insurance linked UHC reforms would be insufficient for the State to progress further towards UHC. Kerala with a long and successful history in 'public provisioning' should focus more on strengthening PHC through Aardram Mission in its journey towards pursuit of UHC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Equitable access to healthcare for rural, tribal, and underprivileged people has been an emerging area of interest for researchers, academicians, and policymakers worldwide. Improving equitable access to healthcare requires innovative interventions. This calls for clarifying which operational model of a service innovation needs to be strengthened to achieve transformative change and bring sustainability to public health interventions. The current study aimed to identify the components of an operational model of mobile medical units (MMUs) as an innovative intervention to provide equitable access to healthcare. Methods: The study empirically examined the impact of scalability, affordability, replicability (SAR), and immunization performance on the sustainability of MMUs to develop a framework for primary healthcare in the future. Data were collected via a survey answered by 207 healthcare professionals from six states in India. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was conducted to empirically determine the interrelationships among various constructs. Results: The standardized path coefficients revealed that three factors (SAR) significantly influenced immunization performance as independent variables. Comparing the three hypothesized relationships demonstrates that replicability has the most substantial impact, followed by scalability and affordability. Immunization performance was found to have a significant direct effect on sustainability. For evaluating sustainability, MMUs constitute an essential component and an enabler of a sustainable healthcare system and universal health coverage. Conclusion: This study equips policymakers and public health professionals with the critical components of the MMU operational model leading toward sustainability. The research framework provides reliable grounds for examining the impact of scalability, affordability, and replicability on immunization coverage as the primary public healthcare outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Kerala, a southern state in India, is known to be atypical due to its high literacy rate and advanced social development indicators. Facing competition from a dominant private healthcare system, recent government health system reforms have focused on providing free, high-quality universal healthcare in the public sector. We carried out an analysis to ascertain the initial impacts of these measures among 'hard to reach groups' as part of a larger health policy and systems research study, with a focus on public sector health service utilisation. Methods: We conducted Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) among identified vulnerable groups across four districts of Kerala between March and August of 2022. The FGDs explored community perspectives on the use of public healthcare facilities including enablers and barriers to healthcare access. Transliterated English transcripts were coded using ATLAS.ti software and thematically analyzed using the AAAQ framework, supplemented with inductive code generation. Results: A total of 34 FGDs were conducted. Availability and cost-effectiveness were major reasons for choosing public healthcare, with the availability of public insurance in inpatient facilities influencing this preference. However, accessibility of public sector facilities posed challenges due to long journeys and queues. Uneven roads and the non-availability of public transport further restricted access. Gaps in acceptability were also observed: participants noted the need for the availability of special treatments available, reduced waiting times for special groups like those from tribal communities or the elderly mindful of their relatively greater travel and need for prompt care. Although quality improvements resulting from health reform measures were acknowledged, participants articulated the need for further enhancements in the availability and accessibility of services so as to make public healthcare systems truly acceptable. Conclusion: The 'Kerala Model of Development' has been applauded internationally for its success in recent years. However, this has not inured the state from the typical barriers to public sector health care use articulated by participants in the study, which match global evidence. In order to deepen the impact of public sector reforms, the state must try to meet service user expectations– especially among those left behind. This requires attention to quality, timeliness, outreach and physical access. Longer term impacts of these reforms – as we move to a post-COVID scenario - should also be evaluated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite a commendable rise in the number of women seeking delivery care at public health institutions in South India, it is unclear if the benefit accrues to wealthier or poorer socio-economic groups. The study's aim was to investigate at how the public subsidy is distributed among Indian women who give birth in public hospitals in the southern regions. Methods: Data from the Indian Demographic Health Survey's fifth wave (NFHS-5, 2019–21) was used in this study. A total of 22, 403 were institutional deliveries across all the southern states of India were included. Out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) on childbirth in health institutions was the outcome variable. We used summary statistics, Benefits Incidence Analysis (BIA), concentration index (CI), and concentration curve (CC) were used. Results: Most women in the lowest, poorest, and medium quintiles of wealth opted to give birth in public facilities. In contrast, about 69% of mothers belonging to highest quintile gave birth in private health institutions. The magnitude of CI and CC of institutional delivery indicates that public sector usage was concentrated among poorer quintiles [CIX: − 0.178; SE: 0.005; p < 0.001] and private sector usage was concentrated among wealthier quintiles [CIX: 0.239; SE: 0.006; p < 0.001]. Benefit incidence analyses suggest that middle quintile of women received the maximum public subsidy in primary health centres (33.23%), followed by richer quintile (25.62%), and poorer wealth quintiles (24.84%). These pattern in the secondary health centres was similar. Conclusion: Poorer groups utilize the public sector for institutional delivery in greater proportions than the private sector. Middle quintiles seem to benefit the most from public subsidy in terms of the median cost of service and non-payment. Greater efforts must be made to understand how and why these groups are being left behind and what policy measures can enhance their inclusion and financial risk protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]