Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe Street E8014, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Health Policy Plan. 2011 Jul;26 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i63-71. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czr027.
Policy makers in developing countries need to assess how public health programmes function across both public and private sectors. We propose an evaluation framework to assist in simultaneously tracking performance on efficiency, quality and access by the poor in family planning services. We apply this framework to field data from family planning programmes in Ethiopia and Pakistan, comparing (1) independent private sector providers; (2) social franchises of private providers; (3) non-government organization (NGO) providers; and (4) government providers on these three factors. Franchised private clinics have higher quality than non-franchised private clinics in both countries. In Pakistan, the costs per client and the proportion of poorest clients showed no differences between franchised and non-franchised private clinics, whereas in Ethiopia, franchised clinics had higher costs and fewer clients from the poorest quintile. Our results highlight that there are trade-offs between access, cost and quality of care that must be balanced as competing priorities. The relative programme performance of various service arrangements on each metric will be context specific.
发展中国家的政策制定者需要评估公共卫生计划在公共和私营部门的运作情况。我们提出了一个评估框架,以帮助同时跟踪计划生育服务中穷人的效率、质量和可及性方面的绩效。我们将该框架应用于来自埃塞俄比亚和巴基斯坦计划生育项目的实地数据,比较了(1)独立的私营部门提供者;(2)私营提供者的社会特许经营;(3)非政府组织(NGO)提供者;以及(4)在这三个因素上的政府提供者。在这两个国家,特许经营的私人诊所的质量都高于非特许经营的私人诊所。在巴基斯坦,每个客户的成本和最贫困客户的比例在特许经营和非特许经营的私人诊所之间没有差异,而在埃塞俄比亚,特许经营的诊所成本更高,来自最贫困五分之一的客户也更少。我们的结果表明,在获得、成本和护理质量之间存在权衡,必须作为竞争的优先事项来平衡。各种服务安排在每个指标上的相对方案绩效将因具体情况而异。