Tag: Research

Posted on

Does results-based financing in health work?

I’ve been reading “An overview of research on the effects of results-based financing,” published by the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for Health Services, which discusses ten reviews of RBF schemes in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). What did they find?

  • “Conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes have been found to be effective at increasing the uptake of some preventive services which were already free.”
  • “The success of CCT depends on the existence of effective primary health services and local infrastructures.”
  • “Although financial incentives are considered to be an important element of strategies to change professional practice, there are relatively few well-designed studies and overall the evidence is weak.“
  • “A small number of more rigorous evaluations have examined relatively simple preventive interventions, such as the impact on rates of immunizations and screenings, as opposed to more complex interventions. The success of a financial incentive is likely to be inversely related to the complexity of the tasks it seeks to motivate.”

Overall, it appears the quality of evaluation of RBF schemes has been relatively poor. The available evidence suggests we need to look more carefully at the (perhaps very specific) conditions under which RBF can work. I’m afraid RBF might not work well in the public sector in the absence of fairly strong government support and political commitment to the project. But that is something to be explored…

Posted on

PEPFAR in Africa: Success or Failure?

My friend and co-author, Melissa Lee, is presenting our paper, “PEPFAR in Africa: Beyond HIV/AIDS”, today at the 2011 American Political Science Association annual conference. I have long wondered whether such a huge influx of health aid targeting a particular disease has a negative effect on the rest of the health sector. So, sometime earlier this year, Melissa and I decided to try to find out!

In our paper, we find that immunization and under-5 mortality rates in African PEPFAR recipient countries improved significantly less than in African non-recipient countries with HIV epidemics. The paper has not been uploaded yet, but I will share the link as soon as it is available.

The President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) was initiated by President Bush in 2003, and is the largest bilateral aid program in the world that targets a single disease. By 2011, the U.S. government had committed $39 billion to the program, which often constitutes a large percentage, if not the majority, of health funding in PEPFAR recipient countries.

Empty corridors: rural hospital in Western Uganda, where PEPFAR spends more on HIV than the government spends on health

PEPFAR’s initial goals focused on prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, although they have recently expanded their strategy to include integrating PEPFAR into more general health programs. How successful has PEPFAR been in achieving these goals? They have helped provide anti-retroviral treatment to 3.2 million people, prophylaxis for 600,000 HIV+ pregnant women to prevent mother-to-child transmission, and supported 11 million people through other activities.

But a real evaluation of how well PEPFAR has performed must include a comparison to how well PEPFAR recipient countries would have performed in the absence of PEPFAR. Of course there is no way to go back in time and re-do history, but Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya in their 2009 paper use a difference-in-difference approach (as do Melissa and I) to evaluate the effect of PEPFAR on HIV outcomes such as HIV deaths, HIV prevalence, and the number of people living with HIV among African countries with an HIV epidemic. They find that while PEPFAR appears to have reduced deaths due to HIV/AIDS, HIV prevalence did not improve significantly in PEPFAR recipient countries when compared to non-recipient countries.

All told, the evidence on the effect of PEPFAR on both HIV and non-HIV health outcomes is mixed. Much more work needs to be done to determine why PEPFAR has been unable to reduce the prevalence of HIV, and the channels through which it negatively affects non-HIV related health outcomes such as child mortality and immunization rates.