28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Out-of-pocket expenditure and catastrophic health spending on maternal care in public and private health centres in India: a comparative study of pre and post national health mission period

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The National Health Mission (NHM), one of the largest publicly funded maternal health programs worldwide was initiated in 2005 to reduce maternal, neo-natal and infant mortality and out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) on maternal care in India. Though evidence suggests improvement in maternal and child health, little is known on the change in OOPE and catastrophic health spending (CHS) since the launch of NHM.

          Aim

          The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive estimate of OOPE and CHS on maternal care by public and private health providers in pre and post NHM periods.

          Data and method

          The unit data from the 60th and 71st rounds of National Sample Survey (NSS) is used in the analyses. Descriptive statistics is used to understand the differentials in OOPE and CHS. The CHS is estimated based on capacity to pay, derived from household consumption expenditure, the subsistence expenditure (based on state specific poverty line) and household OOPE on maternal care. Data of both rounds are pooled to understand the impact of NHM on OOPE and CHS. The log-linear regression model and the logit regression models adjusted for state fixed effect, clustering and socio-economic and demographic correlates are used in the analyses.

          Results

          Women availing themselves of ante natal, natal and post natal care (all three maternal care services) from public health centres have increased from 11% in 2004 to 31% by 2014 while that from private health centres had increased from 12% to 20% during the same period. The mean OOPE on all three maternal care services from public health centres was US$60 in pre-NHM and US$86 in post-NHM periods while that from private health center was US$170 and US$300 during the same period. Controlling for socioeconomic and demographic correlates, the OOPE on delivery care from public health center had not shown any significant increase in post NHM period. The OOPE on delivery care in private health center had increased by 5.6 times compared to that from public health centers in pre NHM period. Economic well-being of the households and educational attainment of women is positively and significantly associated with OOPE, linking OOPE and ability to pay. The extent of CHS on all three maternal care from public health centers had declined from 56% in pre NHM period to 29% in post NHM period while that from private health centres had declined from 56% to 47% during the same period. The odds of incurring CHS on institutional delivery in public health centers (OR .03, 95% CI 0.02, 06) and maternal care (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.04, 0.07) suggest decline in CHS in the post NHM period. Women delivering in private health centres, residing in rural areas and poor households are more likely to face CHS on maternal care.

          Conclusion

          NHM has been successful in increasing maternal care and reducing the catastrophic health spending in public health centers. Regulating private health centres and continuing cash incentive under NHM is recommended.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          India's Janani Suraksha Yojana, a conditional cash transfer programme to increase births in health facilities: an impact evaluation.

          In 2005, with the goal of reducing the numbers of maternal and neonatal deaths, the Government of India launched Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY), a conditional cash transfer scheme, to incentivise women to give birth in a health facility. We independently assessed the effect of JSY on intervention coverage and health outcomes. We used data from the nationwide district-level household surveys done in 2002-04 and 2007-09 to assess receipt of financial assistance from JSY as a function of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics; and used three analytical approaches (matching, with-versus-without comparison, and differences in differences) to assess the effect of JSY on antenatal care, in-facility births, and perinatal, neonatal, and maternal deaths. Implementation of JSY in 2007-08 was highly variable by state-from less than 5% to 44% of women giving birth receiving cash payments from JSY. The poorest and least educated women did not always have the highest odds of receiving JSY payments. JSY had a significant effect on increasing antenatal care and in-facility births. In the matching analysis, JSY payment was associated with a reduction of 3.7 (95% CI 2.2-5.2) perinatal deaths per 1000 pregnancies and 2.3 (0.9-3.7) neonatal deaths per 1000 livebirths. In the with-versus-without comparison, the reductions were 4.1 (2.5-5.7) perinatal deaths per 1000 pregnancies and 2.4 (0.7-4.1) neonatal deaths per 1000 livebirths. The findings of this assessment are encouraging, but they also emphasise the need for improved targeting of the poorest women and attention to quality of obstetric care in health facilities. Continued independent monitoring and evaluations are important to measure the effect of JSY as financial and political commitment to the programme intensifies. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Equity and health sector reforms: can low-income countries escape the medical poverty trap?

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Out-of-pocket costs for facility-based maternity care in three African countries.

              OBJECTIVE To estimate out-of-pocket medical expenses to women and families for maternity care at all levels of the health system in Burkina Faso, Kenya and Tanzania. METHODS In a population-based survey in 2003, 6345 women who had given birth in the previous 24 months were interviewed about the costs incurred during childbirth. Three years later, in 2006, an additional 8302 women with recent deliveries were interviewed in the same districts to explore their maternity care-seeking experiences and associated costs. The majority of women interviewed reported paying out-of-pocket costs for facility-based deliveries. Out-of-pocket costs were highest in Kenya (a mean of US$18.4 for normal and complicated deliveries), where 98% of women who delivered in a health facility had to pay some fees. In Burkina Faso, 92% of women reported paying some fees (mean of US$7.9). Costs were lowest in Tanzania, where 91% of women reported paying some fees (mean of US$5.1). In all three countries, women in the poorest wealth quintile did not pay significantly less for maternity costs than the wealthiest women. Costs for complicated delivery were double those for normal delivery in Burkina Faso and Kenya, and represented more than 16% of mean monthly household income in Burkina Faso, and 35% in Kenya. In Tanzania and Burkina Faso most institutional births were at mid-level government health facilities (health centres or dispensaries). In contrast, in Kenya, 42% of births were at government hospitals, and 28% were at private or mission facilities, contributing to the overall higher costs in this country compared with Burkina Faso and Tanzania. However, among women delivering in government health facilities in Kenya, reported out-of-pocket costs were significantly lower in 2006 than in 2003, indicating that a 2004 national policy eliminating user fees at mid- and lower-level government health facilities was having some impact.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                sanjayiips@yahoo.co.in , sanjay@iips.net
                anshulkastor@gmail.com
                Journal
                Health Econ Rev
                Health Econ Rev
                Health Economics Review
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                2191-1991
                18 September 2017
                18 September 2017
                2017
                : 7
                : 31
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0613 2600, GRID grid.419349.2, Department of Fertility Studies, International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS), ; Govandi Station Road, Deonar, Mumbai, 400088 India
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0613 2600, GRID grid.419349.2, Research Scholar, , International Institute for Population Sciences, ; Mumbai, India
                Article
                167
                10.1186/s13561-017-0167-1
                5603466
                28921477
                53e9af86-5fee-4c60-9fec-f994c534b373
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 11 May 2017
                : 7 September 2017
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Economics of health & social care
                national health mission,national rural health mission,maternal care,delivery care,catastrophic health spending,out-of-pocket expenditure,india

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content134

                Cited by20

                Most referenced authors339