Global Health. 2013 Jul 26;9:29. doi: 10.1186/1744-8603-9-29.
Since the advent of health user fees in low- and middle-income countries in the 1980s, the discourse of global health actors (GHAs) has changed to the disadvantage of this type of healthcare financing mechanism. The aim of the study was to identify and analyze the stance of GHAs in the debate on user fees.
We conducted documentary research using public documents published by and officially attributed to GHAs from 2005 to 2011. We categorized GHAs into four groups: intergovernmental organizations, international non-governmental organizations, government agencies, and working groups and networks. We then classified the GHAs according to their stance relative to the abolition of user fees, and conducted a thematic analysis of their discourse to understand the arguments used by each GHA to justify its stance.
We identified 56 GHAs, for which we analyzed 140 documents. Among them, 55% were in favor of the abolition of user fees or in favor of free care at the point of delivery. None of the GHAs stated that they were in favor of user fees; however, 30% did not take a stand. Only the World Bank declares that it is both in favor of user fees and in favor of free care at point of service. GHAs generally circumscribe their stance to specific populations (pregnant women, children under 5 years, etc.) or to specific health services (primary, basic, essential). Three types of arguments are used by GHAs to justify their stance: economic, moral and ethical, and pragmatic.
The principle of "user pays" seems to have fizzled. Production and dissemination of evidence, as well as certain advocacy networks, may have contributed to this change in discourse. However, GHAs should go a step further and translate their words into action, so that free healthcare at the point of delivery becomes a reality in low- and middle-income countries. They should provide technical and financial support to those countries that have chosen to implement user fee exemption policies, sometimes influenced by a GHA.
自 20 世纪 80 年代低收入和中等收入国家引入医疗服务使用者付费以来,全球卫生行动者(GHAs)的话语已经发生变化,对这种医疗融资机制不利。本研究旨在确定和分析 GHAs 在使用者付费辩论中的立场。
我们使用 2005 年至 2011 年期间由 GHAs 发布和正式归因的公开文件进行文献研究。我们将 GHAs 分为四类:政府间组织、国际非政府组织、政府机构和工作组及网络。然后,我们根据它们相对于废除使用者付费的立场对 GHAs 进行分类,并对其话语进行主题分析,以了解每个 GHA 用来证明其立场的论点。
我们确定了 56 个 GHAs,并对其中的 140 个文件进行了分析。其中,55%的 GHAs 赞成废除使用者付费或在分娩时提供免费护理。没有一个 GHA 表示赞成使用者付费;然而,30%的 GHAs 没有表明立场。只有世界银行宣称,它既赞成使用者付费,也赞成在服务点提供免费护理。GHAs 通常将其立场限制在特定人群(孕妇、5 岁以下儿童等)或特定卫生服务(初级、基本、必要)。GHAs 用来证明其立场的论点有三种:经济、道德和伦理以及务实。
“使用者付费”原则似乎已经失效。证据的产生和传播以及某些倡导网络可能促成了这种话语的变化。然而,GHAs 应该更进一步,将他们的言论转化为行动,以便在低收入和中等收入国家实现分娩时的免费医疗保健。他们应该向那些选择实施使用者付费豁免政策的国家提供技术和财政支持,有时这些国家是受到 GHA 的影响。