Search

Objectives: Many low- and middle-income countries have introduced State-funded health programmes for vulnerable groups as part of global efforts to universalise health coverage. Similarly, India introduced the Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY) in 2008, a publiclyfunded national health insurance scheme for people below the poverty line. The authors explore the RSBY's genesis and early development in order to understand its conceptualisation and design principles and thereby establish a baseline for assessing RSBY's performance in the future. Study design: Qualitative case study of the RSBY in Delhi. Methods: This paper presents results from documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews with senior-level policymakers including the former Labour Minister, central government officials and affiliates, and technical specialists from the World Bank and GIZ. Results: With national priorities focused on broader economic development goals, the RSBY was conceptualised as a social investment in worker productivity and future economic growth in India. Hence, efficiency, competition, and individual choice rather than human needs or egalitarian access were overriding concerns for RSBY designers. This measured approach was strongly reflected in RSBY's financing and benefit structure. Hence, the programme's focus on only the 'poorest' (BPL) among the poor. Similarly, only costlier forms of care, secondary treatments in hospitals, which policymakers felt were more likely to have catastrophic financial consequences for users were covered. Conclusions: This paper highlights the risks of a narrow approach driven by developmental considerations alone. Expanding access and improving financial protection in India and elsewhere requires a more balanced approach and evidence-informed health policies that are guided by local morbidity and health spending patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Financial toxicity is the detrimental impact of health care costs that must be mitigated to achieve universal health coverage. Catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) is widely used to measure financial toxicity but does not capture patient perspectives of unaffordable health care costs. Financial hardship (FH), a patient-reported outcome measure, is currently underutilized but may be an important adjunct metric. The authors compare CHE to FH as metrics evaluating financial toxicity., Methods: A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted across 3 public and private tertiary-care hospitals in India. Adult surgical trauma inpatients in plastic and orthopedic surgery departments were assessed. The development of CHE, health expenditures >10% of annual income, and FH, the patient-reported impact of financial toxicity in the form of asset liquidation, debt acquisition, and job loss, were compared by the health system and using logistic regression models., Results: Among 744 surgical trauma patients, low income, longer hospital stays, and increased injury severity were significantly associated with the likelihood of incurring CHE and FH (P<0.05). Only FH was significantly associated with lack of insurance (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 1.14-2.71). Public hospitals had higher rates of FH than CHE (55% versus 23%). Private hospitals had more CHE than FH (53% versus 32%)., Conclusions: FH is an important metric of financial toxicity that provides important adjunct information to CHE for at-risk populations. FH is particularly informative for public institutions with low direct medical costs. Nuanced utilization of CHE and FH provides a more comprehensive, patient-oriented approach to evaluating unaffordable health care costs that can help shape financial risk protection policy., Competing Interests: K.R. received funding from Harvard Global Health Institute, Connors Center for Women’s Health and Gender Biology, and The Plastic Surgery Foundation. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.)

Introduction: Hypertension is highly prevalent in India, but the proportion of patients achieving blood pressure control remains low. Efforts have been made to expand health insurance coverage nationwide with the aim of improving overall healthcare access. It is critical to understand the role of health insurance coverage in improving hypertension care., Methods: We used secondary data from the nationally representative sample of adults aged 15-49 years from the 2015-2016 National Family Health Survey (NFHS) in India. We defined the hypertension care cascade as four successive steps of (1) screened, (2) diagnosed, (3) treated, and (4) controlled, and operationalized these variables using blood pressure measurements and self-reports. We employed household fixed effect models that conceptually matched people with and without insurance within the household, to estimate the impact of insurance coverage on the likelihood of reaching each care cascade step, while controlling for a wide range of additional individual-level variables., Results: In all 130,151 included individuals with hypertension, 20.4% reported having health insurance. For the insured hypertensive population, 79.8% (95% Confidence Interval: 79.3%-80.3%) were screened, 49.6% (49.0%-50.2%) diagnosed, 14.3% (13.9%-14.7%) treated, and 7.9% (7.6%-8.2%) controlled, marginally higher than the percentages for the uninsured 79.8% (79.5%-80.0%), 48.2% (47.9%-48.6%), 13.3% (13.1%-13.5%), and 7.5% (7.4%-7.7%) for each cascade step, respectively. From the household fixed effects model, health insurance did not show significant impact on the hypertension care cascade, with the estimated relative risks of health insurance 0.97 (0.93-1.02), 0.97 (0.91-1.03), 0.95 (0.77-1.30), and 0.97 (0.65-1.10) for each cascade step, respectively. We further performed stratified analyses by sociodemographic and behavioral risk factors and a sensitivity analysis with district fixed effects, all of which yielded results that confirmed the robustness of our main findings., Conclusions: Health insurance did not show significant impact on improving hypertension care cascade among young and middle-aged adults with hypertension in India. Innovative strategies for overcoming practical barriers to healthcare services in addition to improving financial access are needed to address the large unmet need for hypertension care., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Using nationally representative survey data from China and India, this study examined (1) the distribution and patterns of multimorbidity in relation to socioeconomic status and (2) association between multimorbidity and out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) for medicines by socioeconomic groups., Methods: Secondary data analysis of adult population aged 45 years and older from WHO Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE) India 2015 (n=7397) and China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) 2015 (n=11 570). Log-linear, two-parts, zero-inflated and quantile regression models were performed to assess the association between multimorbidity and OOPE for medicines in both countries. Quantile regression was adopted to assess the observed relationship across OOPE distributions., Results: Based on 14 (11 self-reported) and 9 (8 self-reported) long-term conditions in the CHARLS and SAGE datasets, respectively, the prevalence of multimorbidity in the adult population aged 45 and older was found to be 63.4% in China and 42.2% in India. Of those with any long-term health condition, 38.6% in China and 20.9% in India had complex multimorbidity. Multimorbidity was significantly associated with higher OOPE for medicines in both countries (p&lt;0.05); an additional physical long-term condition was associated with a 18.8% increase in OOPE for medicine in China (p&lt;0.05) and a 20.9% increase in India (p&lt;0.05). Liver disease was associated with highest increase in OOPE for medicines in China (61.6%) and stroke in India (131.6%). Diabetes had the second largest increase (China: 58.4%, India: 91.6%) in OOPE for medicines in both countries., Conclusion: Multimorbidity was associated with substantially higher OOPE for medicines in China and India compared with those without multimorbidity. Our findings provide supporting evidence of the need to improve financial protection for populations with an increased burden of chronic diseases in low-income and middle-income countries., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To inform integrated, person-centered interventions, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of having both a raised blood glucose and blood pressure (BP) in India, and its variation among states and population groups., Methods: We pooled data from three large household surveys (the Annual Health Survey, District Level Household and Facility Survey, and National Family Health Survey), which were carried out between 2012 and 2016 and included adults aged at least 15 years. Raised blood glucose was defined as having a plasma glucose reading at least 126 mg/dl if fasted and at least 200 mg/dl if not fasted, and raised BP as a SBP of at least 140 mmHg or DBP of at least 90 mmHg. The prevalence of having a concurrently raised blood glucose and BP (comorbid) was age-standardized to India's national population structure, and disaggregated by sex, age group, BMI group, rural-urban residency, household wealth quintile, education, state, and region., Results: The age-standardized prevalence of this comorbidity was 1.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.5-1.5], and varied by a factor of 8.3 between states. Among those aged at least 50 years, 4.5% (95% CI, 4.3-4.7) with a BMI less than 23.0 kg/m and 16.1% (95% CI, 15.0-17.4) with a BMI at least 30 kg/m were comorbid. Age, BMI, household wealth quintile, male sex, and urban location were all positively associated with this comorbidity., Conclusion: A substantial proportion of India's population had both a raised blood glucose and BP, calling for integrated interventions to reduce cardiovascular disease risk. We identified large variation among states, age groups, and by rural-urban residency, which can inform health system planning and the targeting of interventions, such as appropriate screening programs, to those most in need.

Background: Despite increasing global attention to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and their incorporation into universal health coverage (UHC), the factors that determine whether and how NCDs are prioritized in national health agendas and integrated into health systems remain poorly understood. Childhood cancer is a leading non-communicable cause of death in children aged 0-14 years worldwide. We investigated the political, social, and economic factors that influence health system priority-setting on childhood cancer care in a range of low- and middle-income countries (LMIC)., Methods and Findings: Based on in-depth qualitative case studies, we analyzed the determinants of priority-setting for childhood cancer care in El Salvador, Guatemala, Ghana, India, and the Philippines using a conceptual framework that considers four principal influences on political prioritization: political contexts, actor power, ideas, and issue characteristics. Data for the analysis derived from in-depth interviews (n = 68) with key informants involved in or impacted by childhood cancer policies and programs in participating countries, supplemented by published academic literature and available policy documents. Political priority for childhood cancer varies widely across the countries studied and is most influenced by political context and actor power dynamics. Ghana has placed relatively little national priority on childhood cancer, largely due to competing priorities and a lack of cohesion among stakeholders. In both El Salvador and Guatemala, actor power has played a central role in generating national priority for childhood cancer, where well-organized and -resourced civil society organizations have disrupted legacies of fragmented governance and financing to create priority for childhood cancer care. In India, the role of a uniquely empowered private actor was instrumental in creating political priority and establishing sustained channels of financing for childhood cancer care. In the Philippines, the childhood cancer community has capitalized on a window of opportunity to expand access and reduce disparities in childhood cancer care through the political prioritization of UHC and NCDs in current health system reforms., Conclusions: The importance of key health system actors in determining the relative political priority for childhood cancer in the countries studied points to actor power as a critical enabler of prioritization in other LMIC. Responsiveness to political contexts-in particular, rhetorical and policy priority placed on NCDs and UHC-will be crucial to efforts to place childhood cancer firmly on national health agendas. National governments must be convinced of the potential for foundational health system strengthening through attention to childhood cancer care, and the presence and capability of networked actors primed to amplify public sector investments and catalyze change on the ground., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Understanding where adults with diabetes in India are lost in the diabetes care cascade is essential for the design of targeted health interventions and to monitor progress in health system performance for managing diabetes over time. This study aimed to determine (i) the proportion of adults with diabetes in India who have reached each step of the care cascade and (ii) the variation of these cascade indicators among states and socio-demographic groups., Methods: We used data from a population-based household survey carried out in 2015 and 2016 among women and men aged 15-49 years in all states of India. Diabetes was defined as a random blood glucose (RBG) ≥ 200 mg/dL or reporting to have diabetes. The care cascade-constructed among those with diabetes-consisted of the proportion who (i) reported having diabetes ("aware"), (ii) had sought treatment ("treated"), and (iii) had sought treatment and had a RBG < 200 mg/dL ("controlled"). The care cascade was disaggregated by state, rural-urban location, age, sex, household wealth quintile, education, and marital status., Results: This analysis included 729,829 participants. Among those with diabetes (19,453 participants), 52.5% (95% CI, 50.6-54.4%) were "aware", 40.5% (95% CI, 38.6-42.3%) "treated", and 24.8% (95% CI, 23.1-26.4%) "controlled". Living in a rural area, male sex, less household wealth, and lower education were associated with worse care cascade indicators. Adults with untreated diabetes constituted the highest percentage of the adult population (irrespective of diabetes status) aged 15 to 49 years in Goa (4.2%; 95% CI, 3.2-5.2%) and Tamil Nadu (3.8%; 95% CI, 3.4-4.1%). The highest absolute number of adults with untreated diabetes lived in Tamil Nadu (1,670,035; 95% CI, 1,519,130-1,812,278) and Uttar Pradesh (1,506,638; 95% CI, 1,419,466-1,589,832)., Conclusions: There are large losses to diabetes care at each step of the care cascade in India, with the greatest loss occurring at the awareness stage. While health system performance for managing diabetes varies greatly among India's states, improvements are particularly needed for rural areas, those with less household wealth and education, and men. Although such improvements will likely have the greatest benefits for population health in Goa and Tamil Nadu, large states with a low diabetes prevalence but a high absolute number of adults with untreated diabetes, such as Uttar Pradesh, should not be neglected.

Background: Evidence on where in the hypertension care process individuals are lost to care, and how this varies among states and population groups in a country as large as India, is essential for the design of targeted interventions and to monitor progress. Yet, to our knowledge, there has not yet been a nationally representative analysis of the proportion of adults who reach each step of the hypertension care process in India. This study aimed to determine (i) the proportion of adults with hypertension who have been screened, are aware of their diagnosis, take antihypertensive treatment, and have achieved control and (ii) the variation of these care indicators among states and sociodemographic groups., Methods and Findings: We used data from a nationally representative household survey carried out from 20 January 2015 to 4 December 2016 among individuals aged 15-49 years in all states and union territories (hereafter "states") of the country. The stages of the care process-computed among those with hypertension at the time of the survey-were (i) having ever had one's blood pressure (BP) measured before the survey ("screened"), (ii) having been diagnosed ("aware"), (iii) currently taking BP-lowering medication ("treated"), and (iv) reporting being treated and not having a raised BP ("controlled"). We disaggregated these stages by state, rural-urban residence, sex, age group, body mass index, tobacco consumption, household wealth quintile, education, and marital status. In total, 731,864 participants were included in the analysis. Hypertension prevalence was 18.1% (95% CI 17.8%-18.4%). Among those with hypertension, 76.1% (95% CI 75.3%-76.8%) had ever received a BP measurement, 44.7% (95% CI 43.6%-45.8%) were aware of their diagnosis, 13.3% (95% CI 12.9%-13.8%) were treated, and 7.9% (95% CI 7.6%-8.3%) had achieved control. Male sex, rural location, lower household wealth, and not being married were associated with greater losses at each step of the care process. Between states, control among individuals with hypertension varied from 2.4% (95% CI 1.7%-3.3%) in Nagaland to 21.0% (95% CI 9.8%-39.6%) in Daman and Diu. At 38.0% (95% CI 36.3%-39.0%), 28.8% (95% CI 28.5%-29.2%), 28.4% (95% CI 27.7%-29.0%), and 28.4% (95% CI 27.8%-29.0%), respectively, Puducherry, Tamil Nadu, Sikkim, and Haryana had the highest proportion of all adults (irrespective of hypertension status) in the sampled age range who had hypertension but did not achieve control. The main limitation of this study is that its results cannot be generalized to adults aged 50 years and older-the population group in which hypertension is most common., Conclusions: Hypertension prevalence in India is high, but the proportion of adults with hypertension who are aware of their diagnosis, are treated, and achieve control is low. Even after adjusting for states' economic development, there is large variation among states in health system performance in the management of hypertension. Improvements in access to hypertension diagnosis and treatment are especially important among men, in rural areas, and in populations with lower household wealth., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in India. Yet, evidence on the CVD risk of India's population is limited. To inform health system planning and effective targeting of interventions, this study aimed to determine how CVD risk-and the factors that determine risk-varies among states in India, by rural-urban location, and by individual-level sociodemographic characteristics., Methods and Findings: We used 2 large household surveys carried out between 2012 and 2014, which included a sample of 797,540 adults aged 30 to 74 years across India. The main outcome variable was the predicted 10-year risk of a CVD event as calculated with the Framingham risk score. The Harvard-NHANES, Globorisk, and WHO-ISH scores were used in secondary analyses. CVD risk and the prevalence of CVD risk factors were examined by state, rural-urban residence, age, sex, household wealth, and education. Mean CVD risk varied from 13.2% (95% CI: 12.7%-13.6%) in Jharkhand to 19.5% (95% CI: 19.1%-19.9%) in Kerala. CVD risk tended to be highest in North, Northeast, and South India. District-level wealth quintile (based on median household wealth in a district) and urbanization were both positively associated with CVD risk. Similarly, household wealth quintile and living in an urban area were positively associated with CVD risk among both sexes, but the associations were stronger among women than men. Smoking was more prevalent in poorer household wealth quintiles and in rural areas, whereas body mass index, high blood glucose, and systolic blood pressure were positively associated with household wealth and urban location. Men had a substantially higher (age-standardized) smoking prevalence (26.2% [95% CI: 25.7%-26.7%] versus 1.8% [95% CI: 1.7%-1.9%]) and mean systolic blood pressure (126.9 mm Hg [95% CI: 126.7-127.1] versus 124.3 mm Hg [95% CI: 124.1-124.5]) than women. Important limitations of this analysis are the high proportion of missing values (27.1%) in the main outcome variable, assessment of diabetes through a 1-time capillary blood glucose measurement, and the inability to exclude participants with a current or previous CVD event., Conclusions: This study identified substantial variation in CVD risk among states and sociodemographic groups in India-findings that can facilitate effective targeting of CVD programs to those most at risk and most in need. While the CVD risk scores used have not been validated in South Asian populations, the patterns of variation in CVD risk among the Indian population were similar across all 4 risk scoring systems., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Importance: Understanding how diabetes and hypertension prevalence varies within a country as large as India is essential for targeting of prevention, screening, and treatment services. However, to our knowledge there has been no prior nationally representative study of these conditions to guide the design of effective policies., Objective: To determine the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension in India, and its variation by state, rural vs urban location, and individual-level sociodemographic characteristics., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cross-sectional, nationally representative, population-based study carried out between 2012 and 2014. A total of 1 320 555 adults 18 years or older with plasma glucose (PG) and blood pressure (BP) measurements were included in the analysis., Exposures: State, rural vs urban location, age, sex, household wealth quintile, education, and marital status., Main Outcomes and Measures: Diabetes (PG level ≥126 mg/dL if the participant had fasted or ≥200 mg/dL if the participant had not fasted) and hypertension (systolic BP≥140 mm Hg or diastolic BP≥90 mm Hg)., Results: Of the 1 320 555 adults, 701 408 (53.1%) were women. The crude prevalence of diabetes and hypertension was 7.5% (95% CI, 7.3%-7.7%) and 25.3% (95% CI, 25.0%-25.6%), respectively. Notably, hypertension was common even among younger age groups (eg, 18-25 years: 12.1%; 95% CI, 11.8%-12.5%). Being in the richest household wealth quintile compared with being in the poorest quintile was associated with only a modestly higher probability of diabetes (rural: 2.81 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.53-3.08 and urban: 3.47 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.03-3.91) and hypertension (rural: 4.15 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.68-4.61 and urban: 3.01 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.38-3.65). The differences in the probability of both conditions by educational category were generally small (≤2 percentage points). Among states, the crude prevalence of diabetes and hypertension varied from 3.2% (95% CI, 2.7%-3.7%) to 19.9% (95% CI, 17.6%-22.3%), and 18.0% (95% CI, 16.6%-19.5%) to 41.6% (95% CI, 37.8%-45.5%), respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: Diabetes and hypertension prevalence is high in middle and old age across all geographical areas and sociodemographic groups in India, and hypertension prevalence among young adults is higher than previously thought. Evidence on the variations in prevalence by state, age group, and rural vs urban location is critical to effectively target diabetes and hypertension prevention, screening, and treatment programs to those most in need.