Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28697732›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2017

An assessment of equity in the distribution of non-financial health care inputs across public primary health care facilities in Tanzania.

August Kuwawenaruwa, Josephine Borghi, Michelle Remme, Gemini Mtei

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

August KuwawenaruwaIfakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Avenue Mikocheni, P.O. Box 78 373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. ajoachim@ihi.or.tz.
Josephine BorghiIfakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Avenue Mikocheni, P.O. Box 78 373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Michelle RemmeIfakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Avenue Mikocheni, P.O. Box 78 373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Gemini MteiIfakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Avenue Mikocheni, P.O. Box 78 373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Ifakara Health Institute · TZLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited evidence on how health care inputs are distributed from the sub-national level down to health facilities and their potential influence on promoting health equity. To address this gap, this paper assesses equity in the distribution of health care inputs across public primary health facilities at the district level in Tanzania.

methodsThis is a quantitative assessment of equity in the distribution of health care inputs (staff, drugs, medical supplies and equipment) from district to facility level. The study was carried out in three districts (Kinondoni, Singida Rural and Manyoni district) in Tanzania. These districts were selected because they were implementing primary care reforms. We administered 729 exit surveys with patients seeking out-patient care; and health facility surveys at 69 facilities in early 2014. A total of seventeen indices of input availability were constructed with the collected data. The distribution of inputs was considered in relation to (i) the wealth of patients accessing the facilities, which was taken as a proxy for the wealth of the population in the catchment area; and (ii) facility distance from the district headquarters. We assessed equity in the distribution of inputs through the use of equity ratios, concentration indices and curves.

resultsWe found a significant pro-rich distribution of clinical staff and nurses per 1000 population. Facilities with the poorest patients (most remote facilities) have fewer staff per 1000 population than those with the least poor patients (least remote facilities): 0.6 staff per 1000 among the poorest, compared to 0.9 among the least poor; 0.7 staff per 1000 among the most remote facilities compared to 0.9 among the least remote. The negative concentration index for support staff suggests a pro-poor distribution of this cadre but the 45 degree dominated the concentration curve. The distribution of vaccines, antibiotics, anti-diarrhoeal, anti-malarials and medical supplies was approximately proportional (non dominance), whereas the distribution of oxytocics, anti-retroviral therapy (ART) and anti-hypertensive drugs was pro-rich, with the 45 degree line dominating the concentration curve for ART.

conclusionThis study has shown there are inequities in the distribution of health care inputs across public primary care facilities. This highlights the need to ensure a better coordinated and equitable distribution of inputs through regular monitoring of the availability of health care inputs and strengthening of reporting systems.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesHealth FacilitiesHealth ResourcesPovertyPrimary Health CareResource AllocationRural PopulationAdultAmbulatory Care FacilitiesChild, PreschoolDelivery of Health CareEquipment and SuppliesFemaleHealth Care SurveysHealth PersonnelHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsDistributionEquityHealth care inputsTanzania

Identifiers

PMID28697732
PMCPMC5505032
OpenAlexW2735316742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.