Analysis of multi drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) financial protection policy: MDR-TB health insurance schemes, in Chhattisgarh state, India

被引:10
|
作者
Kundu, Debashish [1 ]
Sharma, Nandini [2 ]
Chadha, Sarabjit [1 ]
Laokri, Samia [3 ]
Awungafac, George [4 ]
Jiang, Lai [5 ]
Asaria, Miqdad [6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] South East Asia Off, Qutub Inst Area, Int Union TB & Lung Dis Union, C-6, New Delhi 110016, India
[2] Maulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Community Med, New Delhi, India
[3] Univ Libre Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
[4] Minist Hlth, African Soc Lab Med, Yaounde, Cameroon
[5] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Fac Psychol & Educ Sci, Ctr Instruct Psychol & Technol, Leuven, Belgium
[6] Imperial Coll London, Global Hlth & Dev, London, England
[7] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York, N Yorkshire, England
来源
HEALTH ECONOMICS REVIEW | 2018年 / 8卷
关键词
Multi-drug resistant tuberculosis; Health insurance; RSBY; Universal health coverage; Financial protection policy; Inequity; Kingdon's multiple streams; Implementation; Poor; India; FRAMEWORK; ACCESS; CARE;
D O I
10.1186/s13561-018-0187-5
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Introduction: There are significant financial barriers to access treatment for multi drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in India. To address these challenges, Chhattisgarh state in India has established a MDR-TB financial protection policy by creating MDR-TB benefit packages as part of the universal health insurance scheme that the state has rolled out in their effort towards attaining Universal Health Coverage for all its residents. In these schemes the state purchases health insurance against set packages of services from third party health insurance agencies on behalf of all its residents. Provider payment reform by strategic purchasing through output based payments (lump sum fee is reimbursed as per the MDR-TB benefit package rates) to the providers - both public and private health facilities empanelled under the insurance scheme was the key intervention. Aim: To understand the implementation gap between policy and practice of the benefit packages with respect to equity in utilization of package claims by the poor patients in public and private sector. Methods: Data from primary health insurance claims from January 2013 to December 2015, were analysed using an extension of 'Kingdon's multiple streams for policy implementation framework' to explain the implementation gap between policy and practice of the MDR-TB benefit packages. Results: The total number of claims for MDR-TB benefit packages increased over the study period mainly from poor patients treated in public facilities, particularly for the pre-treatment evaluation and hospital stay packages. Variations and inequities in utilizing the packages were observed between poor and non-poor beneficiaries in public and private sector. Private providers participation in the new MDR-TB financial protection mechanism through the universal health insurance scheme was observed to be much lower than might be expected given their share of healthcare provision overall in India. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that there may be an implementation gap due to weak coupling between the problem and the policy streams, reflecting weak coordination between state nodal agency and the state TB department. There is a pressing need to build strong institutional capacity of the public and private sector for improving service delivery to MDR-TB patients through this new health insurance mechanism.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Analysis of multi drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) financial protection policy: MDR-TB health insurance schemes, in Chhattisgarh state, India
    Debashish Kundu
    Nandini Sharma
    Sarabjit Chadha
    Samia Laokri
    George Awungafac
    Lai Jiang
    Miqdad Asaria
    [J]. Health Economics Review, 8
  • [2] Current and developing therapies for the treatment of multi drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in India
    Muniyandi, Malaisamy
    Ramachandran, Rajeswari
    [J]. EXPERT OPINION ON PHARMACOTHERAPY, 2017, 18 (13) : 1301 - 1309
  • [3] Incidence of multi drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in extrapulmonary tuberculosis cases in Northern India
    Maurya, A. K.
    Kant, S.
    Nag, V. L.
    Kushwaha, R. A. S.
    Kumar, M.
    Jain, S.
    Dhole, T. N.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2011, 15 : S27 - S27
  • [4] Multi-drug resistant TB (MDR-TB) and HIV; the effect of introducing molecular testing for MDR-TB at a regional centre in Uganda
    Namuyodi, D.
    Meadway, J.
    Olupot-Olupot, P.
    [J]. HIV MEDICINE, 2014, 15 : 144 - 144
  • [5] Long Term Treatment Outcome in Multi Drug Resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB)
    Prasad, R.
    Verma, S. K.
    Verma, S. K.
    Jain, A.
    Ahuja, R. C.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2009, 179
  • [6] Multi-Drug Resistance Tuberculosis (MDR-TB) Challenges in India: A Review
    Vishwakarma, Deepak
    Gaidhane, Abhay
    Sahu, Sweta
    Rathod, Ashwini S.
    [J]. CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (12)
  • [7] Multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in the Free State, South Africa in 2012
    van Dijk, A. Van der Spoel
    Wojno, J.
    Hoosen, A. A.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2014, 21 : 78 - 78
  • [8] Treatment of multiple drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in Iran
    Mirsaeidi, SM
    Tabarsi, P
    Khoshnood, K
    Pooramiri, MV
    Rowhani-Rahbar, A
    Mansoori, SD
    Masjedi, H
    Zahirifard, S
    Mohammadi, F
    Farnia, P
    Masjedi, MR
    Velayati, AA
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2005, 9 (06) : 317 - 322
  • [9] Molecular Approaches for Detection of the Multi-Drug Resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in Bangladesh
    Aurin, Tafsina Haque
    Munshi, Saurab Kishore
    Kamal, S. M. Mostofa
    Rahman, Md. Mostafizur
    Hossain, Md. Shamim
    Marma, Thaythayhla
    Rahman, Farjana
    Noor, Rashed
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (06):
  • [10] Management and control of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB): Addressing policy needs for India
    Sachin R Atre
    Megan B Murray
    [J]. Journal of Public Health Policy, 2016, 37 : 277 - 299