Understanding efficiency and the effect of pay-for-performance across health facilities in Tanzania
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 21880605 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Peter Binyaruka (0000-0002-1892-7985, Ifakara Health Institute, autor de correspondencia), Laura Anselmi (0000-0002-2499-7656, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre) |
| Año | 2020 |
| Volumen | 5 |
| Número | 5 |
| Páginas | e002326 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2020-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | BMJ Global Health (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 2059-7908 • E-ISSN: 2059-7908 |
| Editorial | BMJ (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002326 |
| PMID | 32474421 |
| OpenAlex | W3030061796 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 7 |
| Referencias citadas | 70 |
BACKGROUND: Ensuring efficient use and allocation of limited resources is crucial to achieving the UHC goal. Performance-based financing that provides financial incentives for health providers reaching predefined targets would be expected to enhance technical efficiency across facilities by promoting an output-oriented payment system. However, there is no study which has systematically assessed efficiency scores across facilities before and after the introduction of pay-for-performance (P4P). This paper seeks to fill this knowledge gap. METHODS: We used data of P4P evaluation related to healthcare inputs (staff, equipment, medicines) and outputs (outpatient consultations and institutional deliveries) from 75 health facilities implementing P4P in Pwani region, and 75 from comparison districts in Tanzania. We measured technical efficiency using Data Envelopment Analysis and obtained efficiency scores across facilities before and after P4P scheme. We analysed which factors influence technical efficiency by regressing the efficiency scores over a number of contextual factors. We also tested the impact of P4P on efficiency through a difference-in-differences regression analysis. RESULTS: The overall technical efficiency scores ranged between 0.40 and 0.65 for hospitals and health centres, and around 0.20 for dispensaries. Only 21% of hospitals and health centres were efficient when outpatient consultations and deliveries were considered as output, and <3% out of all facilities were efficient when outpatient consultations only were considered as outputs. Higher efficiency scores were significantly associated with the level of care (hospital and health centre) and wealthier catchment populations. Despite no evidence of P4P effect on efficiency on average, P4P might have improved efficiency marginally among public facilities. CONCLUSION: Most facilities were not operating at their full capacity indicating potential for improving resource usage. A better understanding of the production process at the facility level and of how different healthcare financing reforms affects efficiency is needed. Effective reforms should improve inputs, outputs but also efficiency
Actuarial science · Business · Data envelopment analysis · Economic growth · Economics · Environmental economics · Environmental health · Health care · Health facility · Health services · Incentive · Operations management · Pay for performance · Payment · Population · Socioeconomics · Statistics · Tanzania · Efficiency Analysis Using DEA · Global Maternal and Child Health · Medicine · Primary Care and Health Outcomes · Finance
Understanding the maternal and child health system response to payment for performance in Tanzania using a causal loop diagram approach
Health facility capacity and technical efficiency in the provision of adolescent sexual and reproductive health services in Niger
Health care provider payment reforms in African states of the Commonwealth—a scoping review
Barriers and facilitators to implementing a single-visit, screen-and-treat approach with thermal ablation for cervical cancer prevention in Kenya
Exploring the roles of players in strategic purchasing for healthcare in Africa—a scoping review
Evaluating urban–rural access to pathology and laboratory medicine services in Tanzania
Who is paid in pay-for-performance? Inequalities in the distribution of financial bonuses amongst health centres in Zimbabwe
Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes
The measurement of efficiency and productivity of health care delivery
Health financing for universal coverage and health system performance
Performance-based financing
Tanzania's Countdown to 2015
Measuring the efficiency of decision making units
Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis
Health systems performance assessment in low-income countries
Technical efficiency of public district hospitals in Madhya Pradesh, India
Outreach services to improve access to health care in South Africa
Challenges to the implementation of health sector decentralization in Tanzania
Using data envelopment analysis to measure the extent of technical efficiency of public health centres in Ghana
Investing in health systems for universal health coverage in Africa
The contribution of primary care to health and health systems in low- and middle-income countries
A systematic review of the evidence on integration of targeted health interventions into health systems
Opening the ‘black box’ of performance-based financing in low- and lower middle-income countries
Do incentives matter when working for god? The impact of performance-based financing on faith-based healthcare in Uganda
Bypassing primary care facilities for childbirth
Who pays and who benefits from health care? An assessment of equity in health care financing and benefit distribution in Tanzania
Does payment for performance increase performance inequalities across health providers? A case study of Tanzania
Performance-based financing
Motivating health workers up to a limit
| Obras citantes distintas | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 1,4 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Velocidad de citación | recent |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 6 |