财政支持和预算编制对尼日利亚初级卫生保健系统中药品供应和购买行为的影响

Brittany Hagedorn, Rui Han
{"title":"财政支持和预算编制对尼日利亚初级卫生保健系统中药品供应和购买行为的影响","authors":"Brittany Hagedorn, Rui Han","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.23.24312494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous work has shown that primary healthcare facilities can benefit from both in-kind support (e.g., medication shipments) as well as increased cash-on-hand to spend to address service readiness gaps. However, there is limited evidence on how facility managers choose to spend available cash or how their decisions to manage their facility budgets are affected by in-kind support. Economic theory suggests that the optimal allocation of cash resources would depend on the context and constraints to how it can be spent, and expenditures would in turn affect the availability of supplies and medications. We test this theory using regression analysis on data from the Nigeria Service Delivery Indicators for Health (SDI), a health facility survey from twelve states in 2013 that included both hospitals and primary healthcare centers (PHCs). We find that facilities with financial resources available to them have higher availability of essential medicines, especially if the facility had earmarked some cash for medication expenditures. However, earmarking for other expenditure categories did not have the same effect on medication availability, which indicates that budgeting processes are an important factor in ensuring medication availability. We find that cash support had large effect (p < 0.001) on availability and that in-kind donations had a negative effect on the probability of expenditure of medications. Additionally, we find the difference between hospitals and PHCs is due to their financial situation (variables become insignificant once support variables were in regressions). Regression analyses also showed that facilities that received in-kind medications had higher availability, but this only had a significant effect in facilities that did not have cash available to spend on medications, implying that facilities are able to address their own supply needs when they have resources available to them. Thus, in-kind supplies should be targeted to facilities that cannot otherwise procure them. Overall, facilities appear to be making effective trade-offs in the context of limited resources and they should receive both cash and support for appropriate budgeting and procurement practices.","PeriodicalId":501072,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Economics","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of financial support and budgeting on medication availability and purchasing behavior in the Nigerian primary healthcare system\",\"authors\":\"Brittany Hagedorn, Rui Han\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.08.23.24312494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous work has shown that primary healthcare facilities can benefit from both in-kind support (e.g., medication shipments) as well as increased cash-on-hand to spend to address service readiness gaps. However, there is limited evidence on how facility managers choose to spend available cash or how their decisions to manage their facility budgets are affected by in-kind support. Economic theory suggests that the optimal allocation of cash resources would depend on the context and constraints to how it can be spent, and expenditures would in turn affect the availability of supplies and medications. We test this theory using regression analysis on data from the Nigeria Service Delivery Indicators for Health (SDI), a health facility survey from twelve states in 2013 that included both hospitals and primary healthcare centers (PHCs). We find that facilities with financial resources available to them have higher availability of essential medicines, especially if the facility had earmarked some cash for medication expenditures. However, earmarking for other expenditure categories did not have the same effect on medication availability, which indicates that budgeting processes are an important factor in ensuring medication availability. We find that cash support had large effect (p < 0.001) on availability and that in-kind donations had a negative effect on the probability of expenditure of medications. Additionally, we find the difference between hospitals and PHCs is due to their financial situation (variables become insignificant once support variables were in regressions). Regression analyses also showed that facilities that received in-kind medications had higher availability, but this only had a significant effect in facilities that did not have cash available to spend on medications, implying that facilities are able to address their own supply needs when they have resources available to them. Thus, in-kind supplies should be targeted to facilities that cannot otherwise procure them. Overall, facilities appear to be making effective trade-offs in the context of limited resources and they should receive both cash and support for appropriate budgeting and procurement practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Health Economics\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Health Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.23.24312494\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.23.24312494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以往的工作表明,基层医疗机构既可以从实物支持(如药品运输)中获益,也可以从增加的可用现金中获益,以解决服务准备不足的问题。然而,关于医疗机构管理者如何选择使用可用现金或他们管理医疗机构预算的决策如何受到实物支持影响的证据却很有限。经济学理论认为,现金资源的最佳分配将取决于使用现金的环境和限制因素,而支出反过来又会影响物资和药品的可用性。我们对尼日利亚卫生服务提供指标(SDI)的数据进行了回归分析,从而验证了这一理论。SDI 是 2013 年对 12 个州的卫生机构进行的一项调查,其中包括医院和初级保健中心(PHC)。我们发现,拥有财政资源的医疗机构拥有更高的基本药物可用性,尤其是在医疗机构已为药物支出预留部分现金的情况下。然而,为其他支出类别划拨专项资金对药品可用性的影响并不相同,这表明预算编制过程是确保药品可用性的一个重要因素。我们发现,现金支持对药品供应有很大影响(p < 0.001),而实物捐赠对药品支出概率有负面影响。此外,我们还发现医院和初级保健中心之间的差异是由其财务状况造成的(一旦支持变量进入回归,这些变量就变得不显著了)。回归分析还显示,获得实物药品的医疗机构有更高的可用性,但这只对没有现金用于药品支出的医疗机构有显著影响,这意味着医疗机构在有可用资源的情况下能够满足自身的供应需求。因此,实物供应应针对无法以其他方式采购的机构。总的来说,医疗机构似乎在有限的资源范围内做出了有效的权衡,它们应该同时获得现金和适当的预算和采购支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The impact of financial support and budgeting on medication availability and purchasing behavior in the Nigerian primary healthcare system
Previous work has shown that primary healthcare facilities can benefit from both in-kind support (e.g., medication shipments) as well as increased cash-on-hand to spend to address service readiness gaps. However, there is limited evidence on how facility managers choose to spend available cash or how their decisions to manage their facility budgets are affected by in-kind support. Economic theory suggests that the optimal allocation of cash resources would depend on the context and constraints to how it can be spent, and expenditures would in turn affect the availability of supplies and medications. We test this theory using regression analysis on data from the Nigeria Service Delivery Indicators for Health (SDI), a health facility survey from twelve states in 2013 that included both hospitals and primary healthcare centers (PHCs). We find that facilities with financial resources available to them have higher availability of essential medicines, especially if the facility had earmarked some cash for medication expenditures. However, earmarking for other expenditure categories did not have the same effect on medication availability, which indicates that budgeting processes are an important factor in ensuring medication availability. We find that cash support had large effect (p < 0.001) on availability and that in-kind donations had a negative effect on the probability of expenditure of medications. Additionally, we find the difference between hospitals and PHCs is due to their financial situation (variables become insignificant once support variables were in regressions). Regression analyses also showed that facilities that received in-kind medications had higher availability, but this only had a significant effect in facilities that did not have cash available to spend on medications, implying that facilities are able to address their own supply needs when they have resources available to them. Thus, in-kind supplies should be targeted to facilities that cannot otherwise procure them. Overall, facilities appear to be making effective trade-offs in the context of limited resources and they should receive both cash and support for appropriate budgeting and procurement practices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Co-developing a comprehensive disease policy model with stakeholders: the case of malaria during pregnancy How does participation in coal-to-gas policy and availability of natural gas pipelines affect residents' well-being? Causally-informative analyses of the effect of job displacement on all-cause and specific-cause mortality from the 1990s Finnish recession until 2020: A population registry study Privacy Protection of Sexually Transmitted Infections Information from Chinese Electronic Medical Records Quantifying the health impact of crop breeding: Revisiting the Disability-Adjusted Life Years Approach
×
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