UHC Forward: Towards Universal Health Coverage

Mutuelle members are able to access health care through all public and private non-profit health centers in Rwanda, which excludes only 10% of the country’s health care facilities that are private and for-profit. A recent law titled the Patient Roaming System was passed allowing any Mutuelle member to seek health care at any health center throughout the country. However, this has not been realized in practice as the capacity to transfer bills and funds is still limited, despite ambitions for more e-health solutions.

Rwanda has about 411 private and public health centers in total, which deliver primary and secondary care at the sector and district level. Facilities are run by for-profit entities, traditional healers, non-governmental agencies, and governmentally-assisted health organizations. Public Governmentally Assisted Health Facilities (GAHFs) are run by NGOs, religious groups, and other third parties and are partially funded by the central government. These account for approximately 40% of all primary and secondary care facilities.

Primary care includes out-patient services, in-patient services, and preventive services such as immunizations, while secondary care is provided by district hospitals, which are responsible for more specialized procedures such as surgery, management of complicated cases such as severe malaria, organization of health services in health centers, administrative functioning and logistics—including the management of resources and supply of drugs— as well as supervision of community health workers. In addition, six mental health operational poles in district hospitals have been established and 30 district hospitals have integrated mental healthcare into the system. Each district health center serves approximately 200,000 people, with an average of one bed per every 1,000 people. However, these figures mask substantial variation between districts and provinces, which range from 70,000 to 480,000 people served per district. In 2006 Rwanda purchased 51 ambulances and 270 motorcycles for the district level health centers.

Tertiary care is delivered at the national level at one of the few specialized, national medical institutions. There are only 4 tertiary care hospitals in Rwanda, 3 public and 1 private. While national hospitals should primarily serve as referral hospitals, in reality there is substantial overlap due to unclear delineation of responsibilities.

Currently, individuals are considered to have access to medical centers if services can be reached within one and half hours by foot; approximately 85% of the population falls into this category. For the 15% of individuals living in rural areas, telemedicine is currently being used to reach geographically isolated regions.

Pharmacies make generic medications available through the independent purchasing supply house called the Central Purchasing of Essential Drugs, Medical Consumables and Equipment in Rwanda (Centrale d’Achat des Medicaments Essentiels au Rwnda or CAMERWA), a non-profit organization that sells medications to district pharmacies and health facilities as a means of financing the activities of CAMERWA. The government fully finances vaccines and immunizations with the Expanded Programme on Immunizations.

The table below summarizes the growth in the number of health facilities in Rwanda since the 1980s.

The National Health Insurance system (NHIS) accredits both service providers and the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) that interface between providers, the NHIS and its beneficiaries. To receive accreditation, health facilities must meet a number of requirements for the physical facility and the personnel, including:

• All medical professionals must be in possession of the current license to practice;
• The facility must be appropriate for service delivery;
• Facility must be registered with state authorities;
• Facility and staff must possess malpractice insurance.

In addition, an accreditation fee is required. Currently 61 HMOs have been accredited and registered by NHIS in addition to about 6,000 primary care providers, 1,000 ancillary providers, and over 600 secondary and tertiary providers. Recently the NHIS announced the suspension of accreditation of new HMOs and providers because there is a need to strengthen the scheme and improve quality of healthcare services delivery through reaccreditation.

In general, the service delivery system in Nigeria is organized on a tiered basis:

• Tertiary facilities are operated by the central government and form the highest level of health care and serve as referral centers for patients;
• Secondary facilities are managed by state governments and provide some specialized health services;
• Primary facilities are run by local governments and provide the most basic entry point to the health care system at health centers, clinics, and dispensaries.

The service delivery system is mixed between private and public providers. The private health care system has grown substantially since the 1980s, to currently provide about 80% of the total health services. This sector, however, is not well regulated or supported. Of all the private facilities in Nigeria, about 50% are for-profit. Despite the large number of service providers, coverage of most key preventative and curative health services is relatively low. There are large disparities in geo-political zones, between rural and urban zones, and with regard to socio-economic status; the poorest fifth of the population are much less likely to receive medical services than their counterparts in the wealthiest 20% of the population.

Primary care delivery happens through primary care units and primary care teams under the Family Health Program (PSF). Primary care units are run by municipalities and are mostly managed by government-employed clinicians. These units are funded on a per capita basis based on the population size within the catchment area. While patients can use clinics outside of their area, they may be encouraged or referred back to their corresponding primary care unit. In some municipalities, primary care units are contracted-out through RFP on a winner-take-all basis to NGOs, who receive similar per capita budgets as government health centers but are not subject to civil service rules. They can more easily hire and fire and some are experimenting with pay for performance mechanisms.

Service delivery within the Family Health Program (PSF) and the Community Health Agents Program (PACS) is the responsibility of the Municipal Health Secretariat. The PSF is the program through which the government reorganized some of the organization and delivery of publicly financed primary health care (In recent years, the PSF has also covered chronic diseases). In essence, it has turned a passive, facility-based delivery system into a dynamic, outreach model in which family healthcare providers deliver care to households and communities. There is a primary care team responsible for a territory of 800-1,000 families, or up to 4,000 people. The team includes a generalist physician, a nurse, a community health agent, and an odontologist or dental hygienist. The team monitors and evaluates the health situation of the population, provides primary care services, and makes referrals to other levels of the system. The number of PSF teams increased from zero in 1994 to close to 32,000 by 2008.

The primary purpose of the PACS is to improve the health and quality of life of the community. PACS utilizes community personnel with no higher education to engage in a wide variety of activities such as registering families, general diagnostics, sanitary health, looking out for critical situations in need of intervention, and overall follow-up with families and patients.

The delivery of secondary and tertiary health care services under the SUS is conducted through both public and private providers. Public contracting of private hospitals has a long history in Brazil, where the SUS contracts for private beds. In 1999, 67% of all SUS hospitals were privately owned, 8% were state owned, and 23% were municipally owned. In terms of clinics, 27% were privately owned, 3% were state owned, and 69% were municipally owned. Such ratios make it clear that while the SUS is a publicly funded system, the private sector is responsible for a large proportion of the services provided.

The role of the private sector in service delivery appears to be waning slightly. Between 1988 and 2005, public establishments offering hospitalizations grew by 50%, while private establishments offering the same grew by 23%.
In 2005, 34% of Brazil’s hospital beds were in public facilities while 66% were in private facilities. Of the beds in the private sector, 82.1% have indicated that they are providing services under the SUS. Thus, there were 55% more beds offering SUS services within the private sector as compared to the public sector.

Public contracting of services with private providers is allowed under MOH guidelines. Managers can complement the supply of services with private providers only when all public health capacity is being used and when the need is proven and justified. Charitable and non-profit organizations, however, are given the status of public sector partners. Furthermore, in order for private entities to be able to provide service to the SUS, they must agree to make available 60% of their capacity to the SUS. These private entities can only serve private users once capacity has been exhausted by SUS patients.