Émilie Robert

A literature review of the disruptive effects of user fee exemption policies on health systems

BackgroundSeveral low- and middle-income countries have exempted patients from user fees in certain categories of population or of services. These exemptions are very effective in lifting part of the financial barrier to access to services, but they have been organized within unstable health systems where there are sometimes numerous dysfunctions. The objective of this article is to bring to light the disruptions triggered by exemption policies in health systems of low- and middle-income countries.MethodsScoping review of 23 scientific articles. The data were synthesized according to the six essential functions of health systems.ResultsThe disruptions included specifically: 1) immediate and significant increases in service utilization; 2) perceived heavier workloads for health workers, feelings of being exploited and overworked, and decline in morale; 3) lack of information about free services provided and their reimbursement; 4) unavailability of drugs and delays in the distribution of consumables; 5) unpredictable and insufficient funding, revenue losses for health centres, reimbursement delays; 6) the multiplicity of actors and the difficulty of identifying who is responsible (‘no blame’ game), and deficiencies in planning and communication.ConclusionsThese disruptive elements give us an idea of what is to be expected if exemption policies do not put in place all the required conditions in terms of preparation, planning and complementary measures. There is a lack of knowledge on the effects of exemptions on all the functions of health systems because so few studies have been carried out from this perspective.

Protocol: a realist review of user fee exemption policies for health services in Africa

Background Four years prior to the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) deadline, low- and middle-income countries and international stakeholders are looking for evidence-based policies to improve access to healthcare for the most vulnerable populations. User fee exemption policies are one of the potential solutions. However, the evidence is disparate, and systematic reviews have failed to provide valuable lessons. The authors propose to produce an innovative synthesis of the available evidence on user fee exemption policies in Africa to feed the policy-making process. Methods The authors will carry out a realist review to answer the following research question: what are the outcomes of user fee exemption policies implemented in Africa? why do they produce such outcomes? and what contextual elements come into play? This type of review aims to understand how contextual elements influence the production of outcomes through the activation of specific mechanisms, in the form of context–mechanism–outcome configurations. The review will be conducted in five steps: (1) identifying with key stakeholders the mechanisms underlying user fee exemption policies to develop the analytical framework, (2) searching for and selecting primary data, (3) assessing the quality of evidence using the Mixed-Method Appraisal Tool, (4) extracting the data using the analytical framework and (5) synthesising the data in the form of context–mechanism–outcomes configurations. The output will be a middle-range theory specifying how user fee exemption policies work, for what populations and under what circumstances. Ethics and dissemination The two main target audiences are researchers who are looking for examples to implement a realist review, and policy-makers and international stakeholders looking for lessons learnt on user fee exemption. For the latter, a knowledge-sharing strategy involving local scientific and policy networks will be implemented. The study has been approved by the ethics committee of the CHUM Research Centre (CR-CHUM). It received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The funders will not have any role in study design; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report and the decision to submit the report for publication, including who will have ultimate authority over each of these activities.

Knowledge transfer on complex social interventions in public health: a scoping study.

Objectives Scientific knowledge can help develop interventions that improve public health. The objectives of this review are (1) to describe the status of research on knowledge transfer strategies in the field of complex social interventions in public health and (2) to identify priorities for future research in this field. Method A scoping study is an exploratory study. After searching databases of bibliographic references and specialized periodicals, we summarized the relevant studies using a predetermined assessment framework. In-depth analysis focused on the following items: types of knowledge transfer strategies, fields of public health, types of publics, types of utilization, and types of research specifications. Results From the 1,374 references identified, we selected 26 studies. The strategies targeted mostly administrators of organizations and practitioners. The articles generally dealt with instrumental utilization and most often used qualitative methods. In general, the bias risk for the studies is high. Conclusion Researchers need to consider the methodological challenges in this field of research in order to improve assessment of more complex knowledge transfer strategies (when they exist), not just diffusion/dissemination strategies and conceptual and persuasive utilization.

Transversal analysis of public policies on user fees exemptions in six West African countries

BackgroundWhile more and more West African countries are implementing public user fees exemption policies, there is still little knowledge available on this topic. The long time required for scientific production, combined with the needs of decision-makers, led to the creation in 2010 of a project to support implementers in aggregating knowledge on their experiences. This article presents a transversal analysis of user fees exemption policies implemented in Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Togo and Senegal.MethodsThis was a multiple case study with several embedded levels of analysis. The cases were public user fees exemption policies selected by the participants because of their instructive value. The data used in the countries were taken from documentary analysis, interviews and questionnaires. The transversal analysis was based on a framework for studying five implementation components and five actors’ attitudes usually encountered in these policies.ResultsThe analysis of the implementation components revealed: a majority of State financing; maintenance of centrally organized financing; a multiplicity of reimbursement methods; reimbursement delays and/or stock shortages; almost no implementation guides; a lack of support measures; communication plans that were rarely carried out, funded or renewed; health workers who were given general information but not details; poorly informed populations; almost no evaluation systems; ineffective and poorly funded coordination systems; low levels of community involvement; and incomplete referral-evacuation systems. With regard to actors’ attitudes, the analysis revealed: objectives that were appreciated by everyone; dissatisfaction with the implementation; specific tensions between healthcare providers and patients; overall satisfaction among patients, but still some problems; the perception that while the financial barrier has been removed, other barriers persist; occasionally a reorganization of practices, service rationing due to lack of reimbursement, and some overcharging or shifting of resources.ConclusionsThis transversal analysis confirms the need to assign a great deal of importance to the implementation of user fees exemption policies once these decisions have been taken. It also highlights some practices that suggest avenues of future research.

Globalization and the Diffusion of Ideas: Why We Should Acknowledge the Roots of Mainstream Ideas in Global Health

Although globalization has created ample opportunities and spaces to share experiences and information, the diffusion of ideas, especially in global health, is primarily influenced by the unequal distribution of economic, political and scientific powers around the world. These ideas in global health are generally rooted in High-Income Countries (HICs), and then reach Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). We argue that acknowledging and addressing this invisible trend would contribute to a greater degree of open discussions in global health. This is expected to favor innovative, alternative, and culturally sound solutions for persistent health problems and reducing inequities.