Lacking the financial support it says it needs to fight the spread of bird flu, Africa has not received any of the money it was promised at the international bird flu conference in Beijing last month. With news of the spread of the deadly H5N1 bird flu virus in northern Nigeria, these funds are now urgently needed to update laboratories, improve diagnostic services on a regional level, and provide the capacity to purchase animal vaccines. Some of the money intended for Africa was also meant to help governments compensate their citizens for any domestic birds that needed to be culled, and to step up information campaigns in rural areas.
Resource allocation and health financing
This set of health economics learning materials has been prepared by the WHO Regional Office for Europe to assist health policy decision-makers, advisers, planners, managers, practitioners and other concerned groups. Health policy and practice is a large and complex area. It can benefit from a range of perspectives, including that of economics. Economics is particularly useful for decision-makers, since resource limitations and financial constraints apply in all health systems and at all levels. There are always more useful activities competing for priority than can be resourced; and this has significant implications for resource allocation decisions, health outcomes and equity.
This paper proposes a comprehensive framework for projecting public heath and long-term care expenditures. Notably, it considers the impact of demographic and non-demographic effects for both health and long-term care. Compared with other studies, the paper extends the demographic drivers by incorporating death-related costs and the health status of the population.
This paper presents the findings of a critical review of studies carried out in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) focusing on the economic consequences for households of illness and health care use. These include household level impacts of direct costs (medical treatment and related financial costs), indirect costs (productive time losses resulting from illness) and subsequent household responses. It highlights that health care financing strategies that place considerable emphasis on out-of-pocket payments can impoverish households.
A much larger infusion of resources than those currently available is needed to make headway in the fight to roll back malaria. On cost effectiveness grounds, in most areas in sub-Saharan Africa greater coverage with highly effective combination treatments should be the cornerstone of malaria control. However, treatment alone can achieve less than half the total benefit obtainable through a combination of interventions - scaling up the use of impregnated mosquito nets or indoor spraying with insecticides is also critical. Intermittent presumptive treatment of pregnant women can bring a small but important additional health gain at relatively low cost.
User fees for health care, also referred to as cost sharing, cost recovery or co-payment, are widespread around the developing world, despite mounting opposition to them. Many studies have found them to be among the barriers to the use of health services, and have shown that they affect poor people more than others. Such concerns have led many researchers, advisers, and policy makers to question whether user fees should be applied, especially among poor and vulnerable groups. In particular, there is concern that user fees will hinder access to essential social services and so prevent the Millennium Development Goals from being met.
The objectives of this study are to assess the costs and health effects of tuberculosis control interventions in Africa and South East Asia in the context of the millennium development goals. The conclusions are that DOTS treatment of new smear-positive cases is the first priority in tuberculosis control, including in countries with high HIV prevalence. DOTS treatment of smear-negative and extra-pulmonary cases and DOTS-Plus treatment of multidrug resistant cases are also highly cost effective. To achieve the millennium development goal for tuberculosis control, substantial extra investment is needed to increase case finding and implement interventions on a wider scale.
There is a marked variation in deprivation between various districts in Tanzania. Tanzania recently adopted a needs-based formula, which includes a poverty measure, to allocate resources to districts. This paper presents an analysis of the allocation of health care resources in Tanzania. This paper analyses equity in current resource allocation in Tanzania, and compares these allocations to equity target allocations, using an index of deprivation. The results revealed that districts currently receiving relatively high allocations according the current poverty-based formula would receive slightly lower budgets if the deprivation index was used in the resource allocation formula. Those with very low allocations would receive slightly more if the deprivation index was used to guide resource allocation. However, the resource allocation differences between the poverty-based and deprivation-based formulae were small. This suggests that Tanzania has already made good progress in addressing equity in resource allocation between districts.
Debates about the best way to fund South Africa's health system have run for over a decade. Plans for social health insurance have not received enough support to become law. In contrast reform of private health insurance regulations have been passed. Why has the pace of reform between the private and public sectors differed? The University of Cape Town, together with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, compared reforms to private and social health insurance to see why their success has varied.
Many governments in affected countries have failed to introduce cost-effective approaches to tackle malaria. Researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine reviewed the literature on malaria control and used economic analysis to assess demand for and supply of malaria control methods. The authors make recommendations for improving both the prevention and treatment of this major public health problem. Governments need to play a role in ensuring access to cost-effective interventions for malaria treatment and prevention. Often such preventions are beyond the means of individuals, and the high costs of treating severe malaria can drive households into poverty.