research issues
DESCRIPTION
PhilHealth Programs and their impact on women’s utilization of health services during child-delivery – the evidence using National Demographic Health Survey data* Raymunda Silfverberg, PhL., Rouselle Lavado, PhD., Anna Lindgren, PhD., and Björn Lindgren, PhD. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
PhilHealth Programs and their impact on women’s utilization of health services during child-delivery –
the evidence using National Demographic Health Survey data*
Raymunda Silfverberg, PhL., Rouselle Lavado, PhD., Anna Lindgren, PhD., and Björn Lindgren, PhD.
•Paper extracted from Licentiate Degree Thesis of the first author from the Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Sweden, 2009
2
RESEARCH ISSUES
General objective: To analyze the contribution of a national health-insurance program towards improving utilization of health services for households in a low- to middle- income country;
the Philippines and its reforms in the second half of the 1990s served as a case for the empirical analysis.
R R. Silfverberg et al, June 2009
3
Specific objectives
1.) To analyze the impact of the Philippine national health insurance on women’s utilization of maternity care services during child delivery: place of delivery and skilled birth attendance
R R. Silfverberg et al, June 2009
4
PRESENTATION OF THE PAPER:
• Brief background on maternal health care issues
• Applied methodology
• Main Findings
• Lessons to be learnt
R R. Silfverberg, et al., June 2009
5
Table 1. Selected health status indicators, Philippines, Sweden and selected regions
R R. Silfverberg et al, June 2009
South East-Asia Region
Western Pacific Region
Lower-middle-income countrie Sweden
High income: OECD
1990 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006
Life expectancy at births, total (years) 65 68 64 74 71 81 80 Life expectancy at births, male (years) 61 64 63 72 69 79 77 Life expectancy at births,female (years) 68 71 65 76 73 83 82Maternal mortality ratio per 100,000 WHO estimates (modeled) 2005 230 450 82 180 3 9
Source: WHO Statistics 2008
Philippines
6
Philippines
Southeast Asia Region
Western-Pacific Region
Low-middle income countries Sweden
High Income: OECD
2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006
Antenatal care coverage* 70 no data no data no data no data no data
Birth attended by skilled health personnel* 60 48 92 86 no data 99
Neonates protected againstneonatal tetanus 64 86 75 81 no data 78
Source: WHO Health Statistics 2008
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
7
a.) Place of delivery
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
National capital Region
Autonomous Regions of MuslimMindanao
Urban
Rural
Lowest education
Highest education
Poorest
Richest
Health facility Home
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
8
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
National capital Region
Autonomous Regions of MuslimMindanao
Lowest education
Highest education
Urban
Rural
Poorest
Richest
Professional Traditional
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
9
Philippine health care spending
Figure 2. Trends in per capita health expenditure at current andConstant (1985) prices, Philippines 1995-2005
0
300
600
900
1200
1500
1800
2100
2400
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Per capita health expenditures, in pesos at current pricesPer capita health expenditures, in pesos at 1985 constant prices
10
Figure 1.4 Trend in share of total health expenditure to GDP, Philippines, 1995-2005
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
Year
Per
cen
t
% Share of health expenditures to GDP
11
1995 2000 2003 2005Total health expenditures by use of funds
Personal care 77.0 73.0 75.7 78.4Public health care 11.8 14.4 12.3 11.6Others 11.2 12.6 12.1 10.0
Total health expenditures by sources of funds Government 35.0 40.6 34.2 28.7 National 19.2 21.2 16.7 15.8 Local 15.8 19.3 17.5 12.9
Social health insurance 4.5 7.0 9.5 11.0Private source:Out-of-pocket 50.0 40.5 44.0 48.4Other private sources 10.4 10.7 11.3 11.9
Sources: NSCB 2002, 2003, 2005
Share (%)
Share (%)
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
12
Philippine health care financing
National Health Insurance – PhilHealth
Legislated 1995
Fully implemented 1998
Programs:
• Employment Program
• Individually-Paying Program
• Sponsorship Indigent Program
• Non-Paying Program (Lifetime Program)
• Overseas Filipino Workers Program (established 2005)
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
13
Philippine Health Insurance…
Benefits• In-patient care coverage• Out-patient care coverage
Ambulatory surgeries and procedures incl. dialysis, radiotherapy and chemotherapy
Professional fees max 1,200Operating room 385
• Special benefit packages Natural spontaneous delivery (2003) 4,500
Hospital charges 2,500Professional fees 2000
Newborn care package (2006) 1000
Applicable to PHI Corporation accredited facilities/ health professionals, public and private. Benefits portable nationwide.
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
14
Why do Filipino women continue to give birth at home and seek the services of traditional birth attendants?
Why the slow uptake in skilled professional birth attendance and delivery in health facilities, despite expansion of PHI population and benefit coverage?
Impact of health insurance, PhilHealth programs on mother’s access to (or utilization of) prenatal care, child delivery and post-partum care?
15
APPLIED METHODOLOGY
Theoretical framework:
Grossman model : Demand for health and health care (1972) in the context of developing country
Bolin, Jacobsson and Lindgren : Extended Grossman model to family unit (2002)
Liljas : Demand for health with insurance (1998)
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
16
APPLIED METHODOLOGY …
Data used: National Demographic Health Survey Philippines 2003
• Women interviewed: 13, 633 individual women aged 15 – 49
• Only women with the most recent pregnancy and live birth during the past five years prior to survey -
4,920 women out of 6,954 livebirths
• Only NSD births, excluding caesarian cases: final sample - 4,519 women
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
17
Descriptive analysis
Econometric analysis: Multinomial logit model
Dependent variables in MNL models:
Place of delivery: Public or private health care facility with home setting as base group
Birth attendant: Medical doctor or nurse/midwife with traditiona birth attendant as
base group
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
18
Independent variables
PhilHealth insurance by type of program – maininterest of the study (excluded other types of
healthInsurance)
• PHI-None, PHI-Employed, PHI-IPP/SIP/NPP
• PHI status of woman, husband, father of daughter below 21 years
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
19
Independent control variables:
Individual characteristics: woman’s age, child’s birth order, birth complications, antenatal care visits;
Household level characteristics: wealth status, woman’s education, partner’s education, woman’s employment status, woman’s empowerment status, number of children below 5 years old, household size;
Community variables: urban/rural residence with/without accessibility problems, regional location.
Important econometric considerations in analyses• Treatment of the endogeneity problem of health insurance
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
20
MAIN FINDINGSDescriptive statistics: selected variablesN = 4519
Place of delivery:Home delivery 67.4 %Public health facility 21.4 %Private health facility 11.0%
Skilled birth attendantsTraditional birth attendant 43.9%Midwife/nurse 28.2%Doctor 27.5%
PHI membership status of womenPHI none 76.0%PHI-EP 15.5%PHI-IPP/SIP/NPP 8.2%
21
I. Descriptives
Figure I.1 Distribution of women by PHI insurance and wealth status, and by educational background
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest
PHI-None PHI-EP PHI-IPP/SIP/NPP
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Low educ Secondaryeduc
Higher educ
PHI-None PHI-EP PHI-IPP/SIP/NPP
22
I. Descriptives: Women’s utilization of health services: Place of delivery and skilled birth attendance
Figure I.3 Women’s health service utilization by PHI status
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
PHInone PHI-Employment PHI-IPP/SIP/NPP
Home facility Public facility Private facility
Skilled birth attendant
0
20
40
60
80
100
PHInone PHI-Employ ment PHI-IPP/SIP/NPP
Perc
ent
TBAs Midwife/nurse Doctor
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
23
I. Descriptives:
Figure I.3 Women’s health service utilization by wealth status
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest
Home facility Public facility Private facility
Skilled birth attendant
0
20
40
60
80
100
Poorest Poorer Middle Richer Richest
Perc
ent
TBAs Midwife/nurse Doctror
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
24
MAIN FINDINGS
Descriptives:
Figure I.4 Women’s health service utilization by educational background
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
Low education Secondaryeducation
Highereducation
Perc
ent
Home facility Public facility Private facillity
Skilled birth attendant
0
20
40
60
80
100
Loweducation
Secondaryeducation
Highereducation
Per
cent
TBA Midwife/nurse Doctor
25
MAIN FINDINGS
Descriptives:
Figure I.5 Women’s health service utilization by residence/accessibility problems
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
Urbanwithoutdistran
problem
Urban withdistranproblem
Rural withoutdistran
problem
Rural withdistran
problem
Home facility Public facility Private facility
Skilled birth attendance
0
20
40
60
80
100
Urban without
distran problem
Urban with
distran problem
Rural without
distran problem
Rural with
distran problem
TBAs Midwife/nurse Doctor
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
26
MAIN FINDINGS
Descriptives:
Figure I.6 Women’s health service utilization by antenatal care visits to health professionals
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
With ANC visits to TBAs With up to 3 ANC visits tomedical professional
Home facility Public facility Private facility
Skilled birth attendance
0
20
40
60
80
100
With ANC visits to TBAs With up to 3 ANC visits to medical
professional
TBAs Midwife/nurse Doctor
27
MAIN FINDINGS
Descriptives:
Figure I.6 Women’s health service utilization with pregnancy complications
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
With pregnancy complication
Per
cent
Home facility Public facility Private facillity
Skilled birth attendant
0
20
40
60
80
100
With pregnancy complicationP
erce
nt
TBA Midwife/nurse Doctor
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
28
MAIN FINDINGS
Descriptives:
Figure I.6 Women’s health service utilization with birth complications
Place of delivery
0
20
40
60
80
100
With birth time complication
Per
cent
Home facility Public facility Private facility
Skilled birth attendant
0
20
40
60
80
100
With birth time complicationP
erce
nt
TBA Midwife/nurse Doctor
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
29
MAIN FINDINGS
MNL regression results:
Direct and positive impact of the Philippine Health Insurance Employment Program (PHI-EP) on women’s utilization of private care facilities and the services of medical doctor during child-delivery.
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
30
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
Public care Private care
Predicted EstimatedPredicted
Estimated
Insurance status: with PHI-EP + + + + *** PHI-SIP/NPP + + - -
Midwife/nurse Doctor
Predicted EstimatedPredicted
Estimated
Insurance status: with PHI-EP + + + + ** PHI-SIP/NPP + + - -
Table 5. Predicted versus estimated signs of coefficients of insurance variables on women's utilization of health services during child-delivery
Significance level: (**) 5%; (***) 1%
31
MAIN FINDINGSMNL regression results…
Effects of control policy variables on use of public and private care, midwife/nurse and medical doctor delivery attendance
Positive effects: • Child’s lower birth order• Birth time complications• With antenatal care visits with health
professionals• Maternal and paternal higher educational level• Household higher wealth status• Household size (small to large)Negative effects:• Presence of distance and transport problems
(especially in rural areas)• Location in non-metropolitan regions
32RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
LESSONS TO BE LEARNT FOR PHILIPPINE POLICY-MAKERS
• Potential effectiveness of programs in improving access to affordable health care for target population groups: general population (informal sector),and indigent
• IPP,SIP – no impact yet on maternal health care utilization
• Determination of actual population coverage.
33
RSilfverberg et al., June 2009
Lessons to be learnt for Philippine policy-makers…
• Design and features of the PHI programs - influence on utilization
o Hospital vs primary care setting
o For the less-wealthy IPP/NPP members?
34
Lessons to be learnt for Philippine policy- makers…
• Promotional efforts of program directed to:
o women/mothers
o lowly-educated
o poor
o rural segments of the society
Picture- philhealth premium payment
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
35
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
Lesson to be learnt for Philippine policy-makers… • PHIC’s incentives to LGUs (as insurer) to widen enrollment of indigents
• PHIC and DOH’s incentives to LGUs (as provider) – improvement of quality of care and accreditation of public health care facilities, i.e. birthing facilities
36
Lesson to be learnt for Philippine policy-makers…
• More attention for in-depth empirical studies on the demand for health care alongside supply- related determinants of health care utilization.
PHI Corporation in coordination with other stakeholders: government agencies and research institutions (RITM, PIDS, UPSE, UPHA)
• Separate assessment of different health insurance schemes vs target populations
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
37
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES FOR FUTURE ANALYSES
• Impact of specific insurance programs from demand-side - target household populations: poor, women, children, rural sectors • Demand (utilization) studies with insurance factor, focused on major policy agenda, i.e. maternal health care
• Impact of health insurance programs on equity issues in access across income groups
• Impact of health insurance programs on the quality of public care
• Impact of health insurance on women’s health per se.
38
Thank you!
RRSilfverberg et al., June 2009
EFFECTS OF OTHER CONTROL POLICY VARIABLES
Public care Private care Midwife/Nurse DoctorWoman’s age: -/- - **/- (a) - / + (a) - ** / - (a)
Child's birth order: Lower order + ***/ +*** + ***/+*** + / +
+***, -***(b) /+**, -* (b)
Complications (Pregnancy and birth) Around birth time + ***/ +*** + ***/ +*** + / + + *** / +**With prenatal care visits with practitioner + ***/ +*** + ***/ +*** + *** / +*** + *** / +**Mother’s education: Higher education + ***/ +*** + ***/ +*** + *** / +*** + *** / +**Mother’s employment status +/- +/ + *** +/ + + / +Woman's empowerment status +/ - +/ + * - / - +/-Household’s wealth status:Wealthier group + ***/ +*** + ***/ +*** + *** /*** + *** / +**Number of children below 5 yrs +/- - /- + * / + + / -Household size +***/ +** + ***/ +*** +* / + +***/ +***Residence: UrbanDistance/Transportation problemUrban with distance/transport problem -/- ** +/- + / + -**/-***Rural with distance/transport problem +***/ -*** -***/ -*** - ***/ -*** - ***/ -***Regional location: Metropolitan regions Non-metropolitan - ***/-*** - *** / -*** -*** / -*** -*** / -***
Significance level: (*) 10%; (**) 5%; (***) 1%; signs to the left- under PHI-EP, signs to the right – under PHI-IPP/SIP/NPPa.) Age 20-29 years; b) Positive effect at lower birth order but negative effect at higher order.