Time filter

Source Type

Kampala, Uganda

Eisele T.P.,Tulane University | Larsen D.A.,Tulane University | Cibulskis R.E.,World Health Organization | Yukich J.O.,Tulane University | And 2 more authors.
Malaria Journal | Year: 2012

Background: Funding from external agencies for malaria control in Africa has increased dramatically over the past decade resulting in substantial increases in population coverage by effective malaria prevention interventions. This unprecedented effort to scale-up malaria interventions is likely improving child survival and will likely contribute to meeting Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 to reduce the < 5 mortality rate by two thirds between 1990 and 2015. Methods. The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) model was used to quantify the likely impact that malaria prevention intervention scale-up has had on malaria mortality over the past decade (2001-2010) across 43 malaria endemic countries in sub-Saharan African. The likely impact of ITNs and malaria prevention interventions in pregnancy (intermittent preventive treatment [IPTp] and ITNs used during pregnancy) over this period was assessed. Results: The LiST model conservatively estimates that malaria prevention intervention scale-up over the past decade has prevented 842,800 (uncertainty: 562,800-1,364,645) child deaths due to malaria across 43 malaria-endemic countries in Africa, compared to a baseline of the year 2000. Over the entire decade, this represents an 8.2% decrease in the number of malaria-caused child deaths that would have occurred over this period had malaria prevention coverage remained unchanged since 2000. The biggest impact occurred in 2010 with a 24.4% decrease in malaria-caused child deaths compared to what would have happened had malaria prevention interventions not been scaled-up beyond 2000 coverage levels. ITNs accounted for 99% of the lives saved. Conclusions: The results suggest that funding for malaria prevention in Africa over the past decade has had a substantial impact on decreasing child deaths due to malaria. Rapidly achieving and then maintaining universal coverage of these interventions should be an urgent priority for malaria control programmes in the future. Successful scale-up in many African countries will likely contribute substantially to meeting MDG 4, as well as succeed in meeting MDG 6 (Target 1) to halt and reverse malaria incidence by 2015. © 2012 Eisele et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Source

Orem J.N.,Health Systems and Services Cluster | Zikusooka C.M.,HealthNet Consult
International Journal for Equity in Health | Year: 2010

Background: Uganda is proposing introduction of the National Health Insurance scheme (NHIS) in a phased manner with the view to obtaining additional funding for the health sector and promoting financial risk protection. In this paper, we have assessed the proposed NHIS from an equity perspective, exploring the extent to which NHIS would improve existing disparities in the health sector. Methods: We reviewed the proposed design and other relevant documents that enhanced our understanding of contextual issues. We used the Kutzin and fair financing frameworks to critically assess the impact of NHIS on overall equity in financing in Uganda. Results: The introduction of NHIS is being proposed against the backdrop of inequalities in the distribution of health system inputs between rural and urban areas, different levels of care and geographic areas. In this assessment, we find that gradual implementation of NHIS will result in low coverage initially, which might pose a challenge for effective management of the scheme. The process for accreditation of service providers during the first phase is not explicit on how it will ensure that a two-tier service provision arrangement does not emerge to cater for different types of patients. If the proposed fee-for-service mechanism of reimbursing providers is pursued, utilisation patterns will determine how resources are allocated. This implies that equity in resource allocation will be determined by the distribution of accredited providers, and checks put in place to prohibit frivolous use. The current design does not explicitly mention how these two issues will be tackled. Lastly, there is no clarity on how the NHIS will fit into, and integrate within existing financing mechanisms. Conclusion: Under the current NHIS design, the initial low coverage in the first years will inhibit optimal achievement of the important equity characteristics of pooling, cross-subsidisation and financial protection. Depending on the distribution of accredited providers and utilisation patterns, the NHIS could worsen existing disparities in access to services, given the fee-for-service reimbursement mechanisms currently proposed. Lastly, if equity in financing and resource allocation are not explicit objectives of the NHIS, it might inadvertently worsen the existing disparities in service provision. © 2010 Orem and Zikusooka; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Source

Guthrie T.,Center For Economic Governance and in Africa | Zikusooka C.,HealthNet Consult | Kwesiga B.,HealthNet Consult | Abewe C.,HealthNet Consult | And 8 more authors.
Vaccine | Year: 2015

Background: The Global Vaccine Action Plan highlights the need for immunisation programmes to have sustainable access to predictable funding. A good understanding of current and future funding needs, commitments, and gaps is required to enhance planning, improve resource allocation and mobilisation, and to avoid funding bottlenecks, as well as to ensure that co-funding arrangements are appropriate. This study aimed to map the resource envelope and flows for immunisation in Uganda in 2009/10 and 2010/11. Methods: To assess costs and financing of immunisation, the study applied a common methodology as part of the multi-country Expanded Program on Immunisation Costing (EPIC) study (Brenzel et al., 2015). The financial mapping developed a customised extension of the System of Health Accounts (SHA) codes to explore immunisation financing in detail. Data were collected from government and external sources. The mapping was able to assess financing more comprehensively than many studies, and the simultaneous costing of routine immunisation collected detailed data about human resources costs. Results: The Ugandan government contributed 56% and 42% of routine immunisation funds in 2009/10 and 2010/11, respectively, higher than previously estimated, and managed up to 90% of funds. Direct delivery of services used 93% of the immunisation financial resources in 2010/11, while the above service delivery costs were small (7%). Vaccines and supplies (41%) and salaries (38%) absorbed most funding. There were differences in the key cost categories between actual resource flows and the estimates from the comprehensive multi-year plan (cMYP). Conclusions: Results highlight that governments and partners need to improve systems to routinely track immunisation financing flows for enhanced accountability, performance, and sustainability. The modified SHA coding allowed financing to be mapped to specific immunisation activities, and could be used for standardised, resource tracking compatible with National Health Accounts (NHA). Recommendations are made for refining routine resource mapping approaches. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Kwesiga B.,HealthNet Consult | Zikusooka C.M.,HealthNet Consult | Ataguba J.E.,University of Cape Town
BMC Health Services Research | Year: 2015

Background: Direct out-of-pocket payments for health care are recognised as limiting access to health care services and also endangering the welfare of households. In Uganda, such payments comprise a large portion of total health financing. This study assesses the catastrophic and impoverishing impact of paying for health care out-of-pocket in Uganda. Methods: Using data from the Uganda National Household Surveys 2009/10, the catastrophic impact of out-ofpocket health care payments is defined using thresholds that vary with household income. The impoverishing effect of out-of-pocket health care payments is assessed using the Ugandan national poverty line and the World Bank poverty line ($1.25/day). Results: A high level and intensity of both financial catastrophe and impoverishment due to out-of-pocket payments are recorded. Using an initial threshold of 10% of household income, about 23% of Ugandan households face financial ruin. Based on both the $1.25/day and the Ugandan poverty lines, about 4% of the population are further impoverished by such payments. This represents a relative increase in poverty head count of 17.1% and 18.1% respectively. Conclusion: The absence of financial protection in Uganda's health system calls for concerted action. Currently, out-of-pocket payments account for a large share of total health financing and there is no pooled prepayment system available. There is therefore a need to move towards mandatory prepayment. In this way, people could access the needed health services without any associated financial consequence. © 2015 Kwesiga et al.; licensee BioMed Central. Source

Discover hidden collaborations