Search

Background: The concept of universal health coverage (UHC) encompasses both access to essential health services and freedom from financial harm. The World Health Organization's Maternal Newborn Child and Adolescent Health (MNCAH) Policy Survey collects data on policies that have the potential to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality. The indicator, "Are the following health services provided free of charge at point-of-use in the public sector for women of reproductive age?", captures the free provision of 13 key categories of maternal health-related services, to measure the success of UHC implementation with respect to maternal health. However, it is unknown whether it provides a valid measure of the provision of free care. Therefore, this study compared free maternal healthcare laws and policies against actual practice in three countries. Methods and findings: We conducted a cross-sectional study in four districts/provinces in Argentina, Ghana, and India. We performed desk reviews to identify free care laws and policies at the country level and compared those with reports at the global level. We conducted exit interviews with women aged 15–49 years who used a component service or their accompanying persons, as well as with facility chief financial officers or billing administrators, to determine if women had out-of-pocket expenditures associated with accessing services. For designated free services, prevalence of expenditures at the service level for women and reports by financial officers of women ever having expenditures associated with services designated as free were computed. These three sources of data (desk review, surveys of women and administrators) were triangulated, and chi-square analysis was conducted to determine if charges were levied differentially by standard equity stratifiers. Designation of services as free matched what was reported in the MNCAH Policy Survey for Argentina and Ghana. In India, insecticide-treated bed nets and testing and treatment for syphilis were only designated as free for selected populations, differing from the WHO MNCAH Policy Survey. Among 1046, 923, and 1102 women and accompanying persons who were interviewed in Argentina, Ghana, and India, respectively, the highest prevalence of associated expenditures among women who received a component service in each setting was for cesarean section in Argentina (26%, 24/92); family planning in Ghana (78.4%, 69/88); and postnatal maternal care in India (94.4%, 85/90). The highest prevalence of women ever having out of pocket expenditures associated with accessing any free service reported by financial officers was 9.1% (2/22) in Argentina, 64.1% (93/145) in Ghana, and 29.7% (47/158) in India. Across the three countries, self-reports of out of pocket expenditures were significantly associated with district/province and educational status of women. Additionally, wealth quintile in Argentina and age in India were significantly associated with women reporting out of pocket expenditures. Conclusions: Free care laws were largely accurately reported in the global MNCAH policy database. Notably, we found that women absorbed both direct and indirect costs and made both formal and informal payments for services designated as free. Therefore, the policy indicator does not provide a valid reflection of UHC in the three settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Availability of emergency obstetric and newborn care (EmONC) is a strong supply side measure of essential health system capacity that is closely and causally linked to maternal mortality reduction and fundamentally to achieving universal health coverage. The World Health Organization's indicator "Availability of EmONC facilities" was prioritized as a core indicator to prevent maternal death. The indicator focuses on whether there are sufficient emergency care facilities to meet the population need, but not all facilities designated as providing EmONC function as such. This study seeks to validate "Availability of EmONC" by comparing the value of the indicator after accounting for key aspects of facility functionality and an alternative measure of geographic distribution. This study takes place in four subnational geographic areas in Argentina, Ghana, and India using a census of all birthing facilities. Performance of EmONC in the 90 days prior to data collection was assessed by examining facility records. Data were collected on facility operating hours, staffing, and availability of essential medications. Population estimates were generated using ArcGIS software using WorldPop to estimate the total population, and the number of women of reproductive age (WRA), pregnancies and births in the study areas. In addition, we estimated the population within two-hours travel time of an EmONC facility by incorporating data on terrain from Open Street Map. Using these data sources, we calculated and compared the value of the indicator after incorporating data on facility performance and functionality while varying the reference population used. Further, we compared its value to the proportion of the population within two-hours travel time of an EmONC facility. Included in our study were 34 birthing facilities in Argentina, 51 in Ghana, and 282 in India. Facility performance of basic EmONC (BEmONC) and comprehensive EmONC (CEmONC) signal functions varied considerably. One facility (4.8%) in Ghana and no facility in India designated as BEmONC had performed all seven BEmONC signal functions. In Argentina, three (8.8%) CEmONC-designated facilities performed all nine CEmONC signal functions, all located in Buenos Aires Region V. Four CEmONC-designated facilities in Ghana (57.1%) and the three CEmONC-designated facilities in India (23.1%) evidenced full CEmONC performance. No sub-national study area in Argentina or India reached the target of 5 BEmONC-level facilities per 20,000 births after incorporating facility functionality yet 100% did in Argentina and 50% did in India when considering only facility designation. Demographic differences also accounted for important variation in the indicator's value. In Ghana, the total population in Tolon within 2 hours travel time of a designated EmONC facility was estimated at 99.6%; however, only 91.1% of women of reproductive age were within 2 hours travel time. Comparing the value of the indicator when calculated using different definitions reveals important inconsistencies, resulting in conflicting information about whether the threshold for sufficient coverage is met. This raises important questions related to the indicator's validity. To provide a valid measure of effective coverage of EmONC, the construct for measurement should extend beyond the most narrow definition of availability and account for functionality and geographic accessibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A global midwifery shortage hampers the goal of ending preventable maternal/newborn mortality and stillbirths. Whether current measures of midwifery workforce adequacy are valid is unknown. We compare two measures of density and distribution of midwifery professionals to assess their consistency, and explore how incorporating midwifery scope, competency, and the adjusting reference population impacts this critical metric. Methods and findings: We collected a census of midwives employed in eligible facilities in our study settings, (422 in Ghana; 909 in India), assessed the number practicing within the scope of work for midwifery professionals defined in the International Labor Organization International Standard Classification of Occupations, and whether they reported possessing the ICM essential competencies for basic midwifery practice. We altered the numerator, iteratively narrowing it from a simple count to include data on scope of practice and competency and reported changes in value. We altered the denominator by calculating the number of midwives per 10,000 total population, women of reproductive age, pregnancies, and births and explored variation in the indicator. Across four districts in Ghana, density of midwives decreased from 8.59/10,000 total population when counting midwives from facility staffing rosters to 1.30/10,000 total population when including only fully competent midwives by the ICM standard. In India, no midwives met the standard, thus the midwifery density of 1.37/10,000 total population from staffing rosters reduced to 0.00 considering competency. Changing the denominator to births vastly altered subnational measures, ranging from ~1700% change in Tolon to ~8700% in Thiruvallur. Conclusion: Our study shows that varying underlying parameters significantly affects the value of the estimate. Factoring in competency greatly impacts the effective coverage of midwifery professionals. Disproportionate differences were noted when need was estimated based on total population versus births. Future research should compare various estimates of midwifery density to health system process and outcome measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]