Household satisfaction with a pilot community-based health insurance scheme and associated factors in Addis Ababa.

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Public Health Research Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.1177/22799036231163382
Biruktawit Abebe Balcha, Mulualem Endeshaw, Anagaw Derseh Mebratie
{"title":"Household satisfaction with a pilot community-based health insurance scheme and associated factors in Addis Ababa.","authors":"Biruktawit Abebe Balcha,&nbsp;Mulualem Endeshaw,&nbsp;Anagaw Derseh Mebratie","doi":"10.1177/22799036231163382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many countries introduce CBHI as their healthcare financing system to ensure healthcare access. Understanding the level of satisfaction and factors associated with it is essential to ensure the sustainability of the program. Therefore, this study aimed to assess household satisfaction with a CBHI scheme and its associated factors in Addis Ababa.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>Institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the 10 health centers found in the 10 sub-cities of Addis Ababa. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Logistic regression analysis was carried out to identify its associated factors and thematic analysis was used for qualitative data. Finally, variables with a <i>p</i>-value of <0.05 have been considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, the overall satisfaction level of households with CBHI was 46.3%. Satisfaction was associated with valid CBHI management regulations (AOR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.46), participants who received the right drug (AOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.93), households who got immediate care (AOR = 4.95, 95% CI: 2.72, 8.98), those who agreed with the adequacy of medical equipment (AOR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.69), and households who agreed with qualification of health personnel (AOR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.20) were more satisfied with the scheme than their counterparts. The challenges mentioned by the discussants were the shortage of drugs, poor attitude of health professionals, absence of kenema pharmacy, lack of laboratory services, lack of awareness about the CBHI scheme, and tight payment schedule.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>the satisfaction level of households was low. To achieve a better result, the concerned bodies should work to improve the availability of medication, and medical equipment and improve the attitude of healthcare workers.</p>","PeriodicalId":45958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/47/d9/10.1177_22799036231163382.PMC10102943.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22799036231163382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many countries introduce CBHI as their healthcare financing system to ensure healthcare access. Understanding the level of satisfaction and factors associated with it is essential to ensure the sustainability of the program. Therefore, this study aimed to assess household satisfaction with a CBHI scheme and its associated factors in Addis Ababa.

Design and methods: Institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the 10 health centers found in the 10 sub-cities of Addis Ababa. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Logistic regression analysis was carried out to identify its associated factors and thematic analysis was used for qualitative data. Finally, variables with a p-value of <0.05 have been considered statistically significant.

Results: In this study, the overall satisfaction level of households with CBHI was 46.3%. Satisfaction was associated with valid CBHI management regulations (AOR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.46), participants who received the right drug (AOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.93), households who got immediate care (AOR = 4.95, 95% CI: 2.72, 8.98), those who agreed with the adequacy of medical equipment (AOR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.69), and households who agreed with qualification of health personnel (AOR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.20) were more satisfied with the scheme than their counterparts. The challenges mentioned by the discussants were the shortage of drugs, poor attitude of health professionals, absence of kenema pharmacy, lack of laboratory services, lack of awareness about the CBHI scheme, and tight payment schedule.

Conclusions: the satisfaction level of households was low. To achieve a better result, the concerned bodies should work to improve the availability of medication, and medical equipment and improve the attitude of healthcare workers.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家庭对亚的斯亚贝巴社区医疗保险试点计划及其相关因素的满意度。
背景:许多国家引入CBHI作为其医疗融资系统,以确保医疗服务的可及性。了解满意度水平和与之相关的因素对于确保项目的可持续性至关重要。因此,本研究旨在评估亚的斯亚贝巴家庭对家庭健康计划的满意度及其相关因素。设计和方法:在亚的斯亚贝巴10个副城市的10个保健中心进行了基于机构的横断面研究。采用定量和定性两种方法。采用Logistic回归分析确定其相关因素,定性数据采用专题分析。最后,p值为结果的变量:在本研究中,家庭对CBHI的总体满意度为46.3%。满意度与有效CBHI有关管理规定(AOR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.46),参与者收到正确的药物(AOR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.93),家庭有直接护理(AOR = 4.95, 95% CI: 2.72, 8.98),那些同意适当的医疗设备(优势比= 1.65,95% CI: 1.02, 2.69),和家庭谁同意卫生人员资格(AOR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.12, 3.20)比同行更满意方案。讨论者提到的挑战是药品短缺、卫生专业人员态度差、缺乏凯内马药房、缺乏实验室服务、缺乏对社区卫生保健计划的认识以及付款时间表紧张。结论:家庭满意度较低。为了取得更好的结果,有关机构应努力改善药物和医疗设备的供应,并改善保健工作者的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health Research
Journal of Public Health Research PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.30%
发文量
116
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health Research (JPHR) is an online Open Access, peer-reviewed journal in the field of public health science. The aim of the journal is to stimulate debate and dissemination of knowledge in the public health field in order to improve efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency of public health interventions to improve health outcomes of populations. This aim can only be achieved by adopting a global and multidisciplinary approach. The Journal of Public Health Research publishes contributions from both the “traditional'' disciplines of public health, including hygiene, epidemiology, health education, environmental health, occupational health, health policy, hospital management, health economics, law and ethics as well as from the area of new health care fields including social science, communication science, eHealth and mHealth philosophy, health technology assessment, genetics research implications, population-mental health, gender and disparity issues, global and migration-related themes. In support of this approach, JPHR strongly encourages the use of real multidisciplinary approaches and analyses in the manuscripts submitted to the journal. In addition to Original research, Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, Meta-synthesis and Perspectives and Debate articles, JPHR publishes newsworthy Brief Reports, Letters and Study Protocols related to public health and public health management activities.
期刊最新文献
Effect of electroacupuncture on total motile sperm count and sperm motility. Happiness among university students and associated factors: A cross-sectional study in Vietnam. Knowledge, attitude, and practice towards dengue fever among medical students in Sudan: A cross-sectional study. Dissemination and implementation science frameworks and strategies to increase breast cancer screening for at-risk women in the United States: A scoping review. Social support in recently diagnosed diabetic patients: Risk factor for depression?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1