Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32013955›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2020

Examining purchasing reforms towards universal health coverage by the National Hospital Insurance Fund in Kenya.

Rahab Mbau, Evelyn Kabia, Ayako Honda, Kara Hanson, Edwine Barasa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Challenges and Opportunities of Universal Health Coverage in Africa: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Rahab MbauHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme, P.O. BOX 43640-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. RMbau@kemri-wellcome.org.ORCID 0000-0001-6705-049X
Evelyn KabiaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme, P.O. BOX 43640-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Ayako HondaSophia University, Chiyoda City, Japan.
Kara HansonLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Edwine BarasaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI Wellcome Trust Research Programme, P.O. BOX 43640-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKenya has prioritized the attainment of universal health coverage (UHC) through the expansion of health insurance coverage by the National Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF). In 2015, the NHIF introduced reforms in premium contribution rates, benefit packages, and provider payment methods. We examined the influence of these reforms on NHIF's purchasing practices and their implications for strategic purchasing and health system goals of equity, efficiency and quality.

methodsWe conducted an embedded case study with the NHIF as the case and the reforms as embedded units of analysis. We collected data at the national level and in two purposively selected counties through 41 in-depth interviews with health financing stakeholders, facility managers and frontline providers; 4 focus group discussions with 51 NHIF members; and, document reviews. We analysed the data using a Framework approach.

resultsThe new NHIF reforms were characterized by weak purchasing actions. Firstly, the new premium contribution rates were inadequately communicated and unaffordable for certain citizen groups. Secondly, while the new benefit packages were reported to be based on service needs, preferences and values of the population, they were inadequately communicated and unequally distributed across different citizen groups. In addition, the presence of service delivery infrastructure gaps in public healthcare facilities and the pro-urban and pro-private distribution of contracted health facilities compromised delivery of, and access to, these new services. Lastly, the new provider payment methods and rates were considered inadequate, with delayed payments and weak links to financial accountability mechanisms which compromised their ability to incentivize equity, efficiency and quality of healthcare delivery.

conclusionWhile NHIF sought to expand population and service coverage and reduce out-of-pocket payments with the new reforms, weaknesses in the reforms' design and implementation limited NHIF's purchasing actions with negative implications for the health system goals of equity, efficiency and quality. For the reforms to accelerate the country's progress towards UHC, policy makers at the NHIF and, national and county government should make deliberate efforts to align the design and implementation of such reforms with strategic purchasing actions that are aimed at improving health system goals.

Indexed as

Government ProgramsHealthcare FinancingHealth Care ReformHealth EquityNational Health ProgramsUniversal Health InsuranceFederal GovernmentFinancial ManagementHealth ExpendituresHealth FacilitiesHumansInsurance, HealthKenyaLocal GovernmentMedical AssistanceQuality of Health CareEfficiencyEquityNational Hospital Insurance FundPurchasing reformsQualityStrategic purchasingUniversal health coverage

Identifiers

PMID32013955
PMCPMC6998279

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.