Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34503478›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Primary healthcare seeking behaviour of low-income patients across the public and private health sectors in South Africa.

Kerensa Govender, Sarah Girdwood, Daniel Letswalo, Lawrence Long, G Meyer-Rath, J Miot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Barriers to accessing and utilising under-five primary health care services in Vhembe District.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

6 authors.

Kerensa GovenderDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. kgovender@heroza.org.
Sarah GirdwoodDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Daniel LetswaloHealth Economics and Epidemiology Research Office (HE2RO), Wits Health Consortium, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Lawrence LongDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
G Meyer-RathDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
J MiotDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe proposed National Health Insurance (NHI) system aims to re-engineer primary healthcare (PHC) in South Africa, envisioning both private sector providers and public sector clinics as independent contracting units to the NHI Fund. In 2017, 16% of the South African population had private medical insurance and predominately utilised private providers. However, it is estimated that up to 28% of the population access private PHC services, with a meaningful segment of the low-income, uninsured population paying for these services out-of-pocket. The study objective was to characterise the health seeking behaviour of low-income, patients accessing PHC services in both the public and private sectors, patient movement between sectors, and factors influencing their facility choice.

methodsWe conducted once-off patient interviews on a random sample of 153 patients at 7 private PHC providers (primarily providing services to the low-income mostly uninsured patient population) and their matched public PHC clinic (7 facilities).

resultsThe majority of participants were economically active (96/153, 63%), 139/153 (91%) did not have health insurance, and 104/153 (68%) earned up to $621/month. A multiple response question found affordability (67%) and convenience (60%) were ranked as the most important reasons for choosing to usually access care at public clinics (48%); whilst convenience (71%) and quality of care (59%) were key reasons for choosing the private sector (32%). There is movement between sectors: 23/76 (30%) of those interviewed at a private facility and 8/77 (10%) of those interviewed at a public facility indicated usually accessing PHC services at a mix of private and public facilities. Results indicate cycling between the private and public sectors with different factors influencing facility choice.

conclusionsIt is imperative to understand the potential impact on where PHC services are accessed once affordability is mitigated through the NHI as this has implications on planning and contracting of services under the NHI.

Indexed as

Private SectorPublic SectorHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePrimary Health CareSouth AfricaHealth care seeking behaviourNHIPreferencesPrimary healthcarePrivate sectorUtilisation

Identifiers

PMID34503478
PMCPMC8431853

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.