IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/64717.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Financial accessibility and user fee reforms for maternal- health care in five sub-Saharan countries: a quasi-experimental analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Leone, Tiziana
  • Cetorelli, Valeria
  • Neal, Sarah
  • Matthews, Zoë

Abstract

Objectives: Evidence on whether removing fees benefits the poorest is patchy and weak. The aim of this paper is to measure the impact of user fee reforms on the probability of giving birth in an institution or receiving a caesarean section (CS) in Ghana, Burkina Faso, Zambia, Cameroon and Nigeria for the poorest strata of the population. Setting: Women’s experience of user fees in five African countries. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Using quasi experimental regression analysis we tested the impact of user fee reforms on facilities’ births and CS differentiated by wealth, education and residence in Burkina Faso and Ghana. Mapping of the literature followed by key informant interviews are used to verify details of reform implementation and to confirm and support our countries' choice. Participants: We analysed data from consecutive surveys in five countries: two case countries that experienced reforms (Ghana and Burkina Faso) in contrast to three that did not experience reforms (Zambia, Cameroon, Nigeria). Results: User fee reforms are associated with a significant percentage of the increase in access to facility births (27 percentage points) and to a much lesser extent to CS (0.7 percentage points). Poor (but not the poorest) and non-educated women and those in rural areas benefitted the most from the reforms. User fees reforms have had a higher impact in Burkina Faso compared to Ghana. Conclusions: Findings show a clear positive impact on access when user fees are removed but limited evidence for improved availability of CS for those most in need. More women from rural areas and from lower socioeconomic backgrounds give birth in health facilities after fee reform. Speed and quality of implementation might be the key reason behind the differences between the two case countries. This calls for more research into the impact of reforms on quality of care.

Suggested Citation

  • Leone, Tiziana & Cetorelli, Valeria & Neal, Sarah & Matthews, Zoë, 2016. "Financial accessibility and user fee reforms for maternal- health care in five sub-Saharan countries: a quasi-experimental analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64717, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:64717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/64717/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Samb, Oumar Mallé & Ridde, Valery, 2018. "The impact of free healthcare on women's capability: A qualitative study in rural Burkina Faso," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 9-16.
    2. Kuwawenaruwa, August & Ramsey, Kate & Binyaruka, Peter & Baraka, Jitihada & Manzi, Fatuma & Borghi, Josephine, 2019. "Implementation and effectiveness of free health insurance for the poor pregnant women in Tanzania: A mixed methods evaluation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 17-25.
    3. Renard, Yohan, 2022. "From fees to free: User fee removal, maternal health care utilization and child health in Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E6 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:64717. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.