About
Diagnose & Prioritize
Take Action
Consider Related Elements
Learn from Others
Take a Deep Dive
Jump to Section
⬇ About
⬇ Diagnose & Prioritize
⬇ Take Action
⬇ Consider Related Elements
⬇ Learn from Others
⬇ Take a Deep Dive

Access is a linchpin in improving primary health care

Even if services are present and of high quality at the point of care, if users experience barriers to accessing and using it, health outcomes will not improve. In kind, if services are accessible but do not meet a minimum standard of quality, outcomes will not improve and patient trust in PHC may suffer.

This subdomain of access measures whether patients have equitable access to PHC services despite financial or geographic-related challenges.1 The basic structural availability of facilities is a starting point for understanding effective service delivery and is measured under inputs. By contrast, this subdomain is considered from the point of view of the patient when trying to access care or at the point of care. By this definition, in order for services to be considered accessible, patients must face no actual or perceived barriers to receiving services. 

Ensuring access from the users’ perspective can help enable patients to receive the right care at the right place at the right time. Access is a linchpin in improving primary health care; even if services are present and high quality at the point of care, if users experience barriers to accessing and using it, health outcomes will not improve. In kind, if services are accessible but do not meet a minimum standard of quality, outcomes will not improve and patient trust in PHC may suffer. The components of access which relate to the quality are discussed in the Service Quality and Primary Care Functions modules. 

Here we consider two elements of access: financial access and geographic access. Both of these components of access may be impacted by a wide array of individual and/or community socioeconomic characteristics—including poverty, gender, sex or sexual identity, caste, ethnicity, age, and race. These social determinants may have a significant impact on access within or between countries, and improvement may require concomitant efforts to improve social disparities. Another important element of access that is frequently overlooked is the role of language, particularly among indigenous populations. Global health interventions that fail to incorporate linguistic access for indigenous populations may contribute to widening health disparities.2 Thus, while social determinants and context – political, social, demographic, and socioeconomic – underlie all aspects of the PHC system, they are particularly salient within access.

Building consensus on what accessible care looks like and key strategies to fix gaps is an important step in the improvement process. As mentioned above, the two elements of access are financial access and geographic access. Financial access means that there are no or few cost barriers to receipt of care, including prohibitive user fees, out-of-pocket (OOP) payments, or other costs associated with care seeking such as transportation or childcare costs. Ensuring financial access can be addressed by a number of approaches ranging from community to national-level interventions. Financial access is distinct from financial coverage. While financial coverage means having adequate financial protection, financial access focuses on the local success of interventions to ensure financial access from the patient perspective. An individual may have financial coverage through health insurance, but if he or she must use significant financial resources to access care in practice, financial access is not achieved. Geographic access is defined as the absence of barriers including distance, transportation, and other physical challenges in accessing care when needed. This is influenced in part by decisions made in the allocation of resources, equity, and investments into infrastructure. Continue reading for ways to improve both financial and geographic access in your context. Please note that access is an aim and an outcome of a strong PHC system, rather than a system, input, or process. Factors that influence access at the system or input level, such as the distribution of PHC providers and facilities, are discussed in greater detail in the 'consider the related elements' section of this module.

PHCPI is a partnership dedicated to transforming the global state of primary health care, beginning with better measurement. While the content in this report represents the position of the partnership as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any individual partner organization.

Read on to learn how to use country data to:

  • Make informed decisions about where to spend time and resources 
  • Track progress and communicate these updates to constituents or funders 
  • Gain new insights into long-standing trends or surprising gaps

Countries can measure their performance using the Vital Signs Profile (VSP). The VSP is a first-of-its-kind tool that helps stakeholders quickly diagnose the main strengths and weaknesses of primary health care in their country in a rigorous, standardized way. The second-generation Vital Signs Profile measures the essential elements of PHC across three main pillars: Capacity, Performance, and Impact. Access is measured in the Access & Availability domain of the VSP (Performance Pillar).

If a country does not have a VSP, it can begin to focus improvement efforts using the subsections below, which address:

Key indications

Countries that do not have a VSP can use the following indications to help start to identify whether access is an appropriate area of focus and where to focus improvement efforts:

  • Inadequate facility distribution: if facilities are physically unavailable or are unevenly distributed across a geographic area, then it may indicate barriers to geographic access. In addition, this can contribute to community-based health providers being unable to access facilities to restock supplies or to refer patients to higher levels of care
  • Shortage of providers: if there is a shortage of providers, either due to an overall low provider to population ratio, a shortage in certain geographic areas, or a shortage or maldistribution of a particular type of provider (e.g. doctor, nurse, technician) then access to services will be extremely limited for certain patient populations
  • Transportation barriers: if patients and/or providers face transportation barriers to accessing services, such as those due to checkpoints and curfews, then this is an indication that access is being limited. Transportation barriers may also contribute to provider absenteeism, making it difficult for patients to access needed services, even when they can physically seek care.
  • High out-of-pocket-expenditure: if individual out-of-pocket expenditures comprise a significant percentage of total annual health expenditure, with a disproportionate share of OOP costs falling on low-income and/or uninsured populations, then many who cannot afford to bear these costs will be unable to access care.
  • Poor patient care-seeking behaviour (relative to need): if there is poor, discontinuous, and/or untimely utilization of essential PHC services, then this could reflect financial access barriers, particularly among low-income populations
Key outcomes and impact

Countries that strengthen their health workforce may achieve the following benefits or outcomes:

  • Improving health equity and universal health coverage: reducing or removing geographic barriers to care helps to ensure that patients can access needed services where and when they need them. Greater access to primary care can improve equity in access to health services and health outcomes, especially among marginalized populations. 
  • Increasing efficiency and timeliness: greater access to primary care can improve the timeliness and efficiency of the health system. For example, it is linked to reduced unnecessary hospitalizations, emergency department use, and total health care costs.  
  • Financial protection: financial access helps to remove/reduce financial barriers at the point of care, such as prohibitive user fees, out-of-pocket payments, or other costs.
  • First contact access and continuity: Geographic access ensures that the PHC system can serve as the first point of contact for a patient’s needs throughout their life course, in turn allowing patients to develop an ongoing relationship with a provider or with a care team. First contact access and continuity in turn are associated with more appropriate, effective, and less costly care.

PHCPI is a partnership dedicated to transforming the global state of primary health care, beginning with better measurement. While the content in this report represents the position of the partnership as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any individual partner organization.

Explore this page for a curated list of actions to improve access, which embark on:

  • An explanation of why the action is important for improving access
  • Descriptions of activities or interventions countries can implement to improve access
  • Descriptions of the key drivers in the health system that should be improved to maximise the success or impact of actions
  • Relevant tools and resources

Key actions:

  • Addressing financial barriers to care is critical to improving financial access to care which is a core component of access. There are many different barriers to address when looking at financial access. “Financial coverage” addresses the presence of comprehensive financial protection schemes; these methods may not necessarily ensure access in practice if co-payments, deductibles, and/or transportation and other indirect costs remain high. Financial access, by contrast, concerns financial realities from the perspective of the patient. A patient may be enrolled in a financial protection scheme but lack financial access due to prohibitive remaining medical costs or external costs related to seeking care.

    Key activities

    Health systems level

    • Removal or reduction of user fees: multiple settings have found that when user fees are implemented, there is a consistent accompanying decrease in access – particularly among the poor.3 There are three ways that countries can address the removal or reduction of user fees. First, countries may choose to abolish or reduce user fees for all individuals. This is of course dependent upon available financial resources and has serious financial implications including loss of discretionary revenues at facilities. Some strategies that may facilitate the removal or reduction of user fees will be addressed in the forthcoming Health Financing module.13 Second, certain populations may be specifically selected for exemption through the use of waivers. These populations might be determined by socioeconomic status or demographics. For instance, the poorest members of society, pregnant women, or children under five are common recipients of free or reduced fee services. Finally, the removal of user fees may apply only to specific services such as antenatal care. These methods are not mutually exclusive, as exemptions may apply for both specific groups and selected services. It is important to note that the removal of user fees is likely to increase utilization of services which may overwhelm health systems that are not prepared to provide the volume and quality of services being demanded. In order to facilitate a smooth transition, the World Health Organization provides four important preconditions and considerations for health systems removing user fees16:
      • “Sufficient financial resources need to be provided and effectively transferred to the facility level to compensate for both the loss of revenue at the provider level…and for the desired increase in the use of services.
      • Provider payment and financial transfer methods must be in place – prior to the policy coming into being – through which the promised free services are effectively purchased and through which health workers are incentivized.
      • Efforts are needed to improve and make health services available, bringing them closer to the most distant and vulnerable population groups
      • Policymakers need to look for synergies in implementation and ensure that reform initiatives lead towards a coherent health financing architecture.”

    District & facility level

    • Use of conditional cash transfers (CCTs): CCTs are a demand-side financing mechanism that can be used to improve financial access to care as the payments can be used to help individuals overcome financial barriers to care such as out-of-pocket payments, travel costs, or childcare.4 In CCT programs, individuals or families receive payments contingent upon a certain behaviour – in the case of health, it is often the utilization of specific services. CCTs have been implemented extensively in LMIC.17 Even if the conditions tied to CCTs are not health-related, the payments can also be used to help individuals overcome financial barriers related to accessing health services, such as out-of-pocket payments, travel costs, or childcare.17 A systematic review of such programs found that they can, but do not always, improve access to health services and ultimately health outcomes.17 Important considerations for the success of a CCT program include: 
      • Efficient targeting of poorer groups – specific individuals or leaders within a community may be made responsible for the identification of eligible households. Alternatively, there may be existing social security programs that have similar eligibility criteria as the intended program, and implementers can use their existing lists.
      • Monitoring systems to ensure requirements are being met – implementers must plan programs with consideration of how they will ensure that individuals or households are fulfilling the required behaviours. Examples of monitoring strategies include check-ins with patients and providers during facility visits or home visits. Regardless of the method, however, monitoring will necessarily incur costs and require human resources to implement but is important to ensure that the program is being implemented with fidelity.
      • The presence of high-quality services and resilient staff and systems to withstand increased demand – as with interventions that remove or reduce user fees, health systems must be capable of providing high-quality care both at baseline and when demand increases as a result of the program.17
    • Voucher Programs: A second, demand-side method for improving financial access to health services is vouchers. During voucher programs, vouchers are distributed to a specific subset of the population and these are used to obtain free or reduced fee services at the point of care. The facility is subsequently reimbursed. These programs are especially common for antenatal care or delivery. Some of the benefits of voucher programs include:
      • Voucher programs enable the targeting of low-income or high-risk individuals through distribution.
      • By making vouchers only redeemable at facilities that meet specific quality standards, vouchers may encourage quality improvement processes at non-qualifying facilities.
      • Voucher programs require the use of an information system to track the distribution and collection of vouchers. These data can be used to monitor providers.19

    There are several important considerations for stakeholders when planning a voucher program: 

    • Coverage of vouchers – Implementers must consider the services and individuals eligible for a transportation voucher. Vouchers may be provided for specific services such as antenatal care/delivery or emergency services or to certain portions of the population, most often poor individuals or other high-risk groups. Sometimes, vouchers are used specifically for transportation, in which case specifics related to the cost of vouchers and whether they are flat-rate or flexible often must be negotiated with local transportation organizations. 
    • Method for identifying recipients and distributing vouchers – after identification of the target population, systems must be put in place to distribute vouchers. This may occur in communities as part of proactive population outreach or in facilities. For instance, transportation vouchers for delivery may be distributed when women attend antenatal care visits. However, in these cases, it is important to identify the target individuals who may qualify but are unable to seek care in these settings and reach them through alternative means.
    • System for detecting fraud and tracking vouchers – Implementers should ensure that there are ways to detect fraudulent vouchers and track the distribution and use of vouchers. As always, any data management tool should be easy to use and compatible with the available infrastructure. 
    • Buy-in – In order to ensure the use of vouchers, community members must be aware of the conditions for use. This may be achieved through community meetings, discussions at clinics, radio shows, or other accessible means of communication.20
    • Facility capacity – As with other interventions to improve access, patients must be met by competent providers and effectively run facilities in order to ensure that patients receive high-quality and timely care. These facilities must be sufficiently resilient to respond to increased demand.

    Individual & community-level

    • Community-based health insurance (CBHI): CBHI is generally considered a means for improving financial access among these populations that are often overlooked by other insurance schemes. These schemes are likely to include benefit packages that are closely aligned to community values and needs56Community-based health insurance is a decentralized health insurance scheme that has been used in a number of LMICs. While CBHI schemes are established by communities and are therefore quite diverse, some common qualities include pooling of risks and funds at the community level, not-for-profit payment plans most often at a flat rate and not dependent upon health risk, community control in setup and management, and voluntary membership.56 CBHI has often been implemented in areas where there is a significant poor and/or informal worker population, and revenue collection for health insurance administered at the national level would be challenging. As such, CBHI has generally considered a means for improving financial access among these populations that are often overlooked by other insurance schemes. 
    • Community engagement and participation: by valuing the voices, opinions, and expertise of end-users, health services will be more acceptable, accessible, and appropriate to the communities they serve.

    Related elements

  • Issues of distance, transportation, rough terrain and other geographic challenges act as barriers to patients when trying to access a health facility and can prevent them from being able to access care altogether. Geographic access is a core component of access and must be addressed in order to improve access to primary care services, in general.

    Key activities

    Health systems level

    • Increase availability of human resources: implement strategies to effectively and equitably retain, recruit, and station skilled providers, such as via workforce deployment policies. 
    • Strengthen the capacity of the PHC system to serve as the first point of contact, such as by improving the distribution of facilities and the services they deliver in rural areas, providing community-based care, and conducting outreach activities in communities

    District & facility level

    • Empanelment: establishing panels based on pre-established geographic or municipal boundaries may help stakeholders understand where and why certain groups are experiencing geographic barriers to care and begin the process of developing infrastructure to remedy these gaps.
    • The use of telehealth: telehealth can facilitate access to care in areas where clinics are inaccessible but sufficient technological infrastructure is in place. 
    • Team-based strategies to care: implementing staggered shifts and creating a manageable and even distribution of work

    Individual & community-level

    • Utilize community health workers (CHWs): CHWs can be a valuable resource for increasing geographic access to health services and have been shown to effectively provide high-quality preventative and some curative care in remote areas where access to facilities is challenging
    • Proactive population outreach: Certain health activities (diagnosis, referral, treatment of certain illnesses, health education, immunization etc.) can be effectively delivered directly in communities, decreasing geographic barriers to care.8

    Related elements

PHCPI is a partnership dedicated to transforming the global state of primary health care, beginning with better measurement. While the content in this report represents the position of the partnership as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any individual partner organization.

Understanding and identifying the drivers of health systems performance--referred to here as “related elements”--is an integral part of improvement efforts. We define related elements as the factors in a health system that have the potential to impact, whether positive or negative, access to primary care. Explore this section to learn about the different elements in a health system that should be improved or prioritized to maximize the success of actions described in the “take action” section. 

While there are many complex factors in a health system that can impact access to primary care, some of the major drivers are listed below. To aid in the prioritization process, we group the ‘related elements’ into:

Upstream elements

We define “upstream elements” as the factors in a health system that have the potential to make the biggest impact, whether positive or negative, on access to primary care.

Policy & leadership

Access (financial, timely, and geographic) is dependent on having a conducive set of national policies that include a costed essential service package as well as master facility plans that have determined targets for optional density and distribution of facilities based on local context and population health needs. Without this, access to care suffers. In addition, priority setting at the national level determines how resources are allocated and, ultimately, if they are distributed in a way that ensures equity in financial, geographic, and timely access.

Learn more

Service availability & readiness

Geographic and timely access is dependent upon providers being present where and when they are expected to be, and available to provide necessary health services at appropriate times. If providers are not readily available Inadequate service availability and readiness can drastically impact one’s ability to successfully access care.

Learn more

Inputs

Poor facility distribution and density leads to poor geographic access. Additionally, inefficient facility flow and longer waiting times come without well-designed facility infrastructure, thereby negatively affecting timely access. Ensuring that there is an adequately sized and competent health workforce is also a precondition for ensuring geographic and timely access to health services. Finally, the availability of medicines and supplies is critical to maintaining timely access to necessary care.

Learn more in the Physical Infrastructure, PHC Workforce and Medicines & Supplies modules.

Funding & allocation of resources

Without increased public spending on PHC comes more inequitable financial access. Additionally, financial coverage through risk-protection schemes is essential for ensuring financial access.

Learn more

Complementary elements

We define “complementary elements” as the factors in a health system that have the potential to make an impact, whether positive or negative, on access. However, we consider these drivers as complementary to, but not essential to performance.

Management of services & population health

When it comes to poor management and organization of services, inefficiencies in financial management may lead to bottlenecks in financial access and ineffective distribution of work can create issues with access to timely care. Additionally, facility management should take the lead in addressing barriers such as inconvenient facility hours, inefficient appointment systems and uncoordinated facility flow. 

Learn more

Primary care functions

Untimely access refers to the inability of the health system to provide primary care services to patients when they need them - improving timeliness can help to resolve these issues. Also, a lack of first contact accessibility weakens the capacity of a primary care system to serve as the first point of contact and bring PHC services closer to the people, enabling timely, financial, and geographic access.

Learn more

Purchasing & payment systems

Inadequate purchasing and payment systems can disrupt the continuation of services across facilities and prevent continued access to care.

Learn more

Multi-sectoral approach

If there is a lack of social accountability mechanisms, it becomes increasingly difficult to hold policymakers accountable for ensuring that the entire population can afford, reach, and access health services. 

Learn more

Information & technology

Inefficiencies in financial management and forecasting may lead to bottlenecks in financial access. Additionally, a lack of information systems innovations like appointment systems can lead to inefficient facility flow. Improvements in technology may complement initiatives for improved health access.

Learn more

PHCPI is a partnership dedicated to transforming the global state of primary health care, beginning with better measurement. While the content in this report represents the position of the partnership as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any individual partner organization.

Countries seeking to improve access to primary care can pursue a wide array of potential improvement pathways. The short case studies below highlight promising and innovative approaches that countries around the world have taken to improve. 

PHCPI-authored cases were developed via an examination of the existing literature. Some also feature key learnings from in-country experts. 

East Asia & the Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & the Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
North America
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa

PHCPI is a partnership dedicated to transforming the global state of primary health care, beginning with better measurement. While the content in this report represents the position of the partnership as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any individual partner organization.

Building consensus on what access to primary care looks like and the key strategies to fix gaps is an important step in the improvement process.

Below, we define some of the core characteristics of access in greater detail:

  • Geographic access is defined as the absence of barriers including distance, transportation, and other physical challenges in accessing care when needed. This is influenced in part by decisions made in the allocation of resources, equity, and investments into infrastructure. It is important to note that geographic barriers are best measured and discussed by the amount of time it takes to travel to services rather than physical distance; travel time can account for terrain and transportation availability. Most often, individuals who live in hard-to-reach areas, rural areas, or conflict zones face the greatest barriers in geographic access to care. However, it is also possible that access reforms target these groups specifically, leaving gaps elsewhere. Access barriers may also align with social characteristics. If there are restrictions on the movement of groups of people, – for instance, women are unable to travel without accompaniment, people living with disabilities, and/or people residing in areas of ongoing conflict – geography may disproportionately disfavour these groups. The following includes the biggest reasons why patients might face geographic barriers to care:

    A lack of human resources to meet demand

    Worldwide, there is a substantial shortage of health workers to provide comprehensive primary care services to all populations.1  An adequately sized and competent health workforce is a precondition for ensuring geographic access to health services. Providers must exist and be appropriately distributed both in quantity and cadre. However, there are certain workforce considerations that are particularly salient to geographic access. There are three ways that a country may be experiencing a shortage of providers that would contribute to geographic inaccessibility: 

    • A national shortage characterized by an overall low provider-to-population ratio across all geographic regions
    • A shortage specific to certain geographic areas of a country where the provider-to-population ratio is substantially lower than in other areas—often seen in remote and rural regions
    • A shortage or misdistribution of certain cadres where the ratio of physicians to that specific cadre (such as doctors, nurses, or community health workers) is inadequate to meet demand or to provide specific services

    All of these workforce concerns may impact patients’ experiences with geographic access to care, and adequate attention to the distribution of the health workforce can increase patients’ trust in the health system and its governing structures.2

    Inadequate facilities

    While certain health activities can be provided in community centres or homes, others require supplies, equipment, and/or technology that must be housed within a physical clinic. In areas with very low population densities, it may be logical to rely more heavily on community-based health services with systems for ready access to emergency care and referral systems for ensuring access to higher levels of care when needed. Mobile clinics are also often used to meet gaps in the availability of facilities. However, it is important to note that by nature of being mobile, these clinics may not always contribute to the formation of continuous relationships between patients and providers. 

    Transportation barriers

    Even in areas where clinics are close to communities, if there is not adequate transportation to reach them, accessibility is compromised. The same barriers experienced by patients may also apply to providers and influence their ability to access facilities to provide care. For instance, in Iraq, one study found that doctors faced many transportation barriers including checkpoints, curfews, and inadequate transportation, resulting in widespread absenteeism.3 Similar to areas with inadequate facility distribution, transportation barriers can be mitigated through the implementation of community-based services -  often delivered by CHWs – for non-acute care. Community-based care is discussed in greater detail in the population health management module. 

  • Financial access means that there are no or few cost barriers to receipt of care, including prohibitive user fees, out-of-pocket (OOP) payments, or other costs associated with care seeking such as transportation or childcare costs. Ensuring financial access can be addressed by a number of approaches ranging from community to national-level interventions. Financial access is distinct from financial coverage. While financial coverage means having adequate financial protection, financial access focuses on the local success of interventions to ensure financial access from the patient perspective. An individual may have financial coverage through health insurance, but if he or she must use significant financial resources to access care in practice, financial access is not achieved.

    While financial coverage means having adequate financial protection, financial access focuses on the local success of interventions to ensure financial access from the patient perspective. An individual may have financial coverage through health insurance, but if he or she must use significant financial resources to access care in practice, financial access is not achieved.

    While the impact of reforms to improve timeliness will vary by context, timely access to services may help countries to achieve various goals and outcomes important for health system strengthening, such as:

    • Financial protection for patients: Financial access interventions can help to remove or reduce financial barriers at the point of care, such as prohibitive user fees, out-of-pocket payments, or other costs.
    • Improved utilization and health outcomes: Removing or reducing financial barriers helps to ensure that patients can access care when they need it, in turn improving health outcomes.
    • Universal health coverage: Financial access is central to efforts to ensure equitable access to high-quality PHC and ultimately, to achieve Universal Health Coverage.

    Financial access is a key component of achieving universal access to high-quality PHC. For more information on measuring “access”  in a PHC system, visit  PHCPI’s measurement page. 

    Who is not accessing care due to financial reasons?

    In order to develop a targeted intervention, it is important to understand who is not accessing care due to financial constraints. These populations may not always be the most marginalized in society, since financial protection schemes often (but not always) target these individuals specifically. For instance, populations that are often overlooked by financial access reforms include informal sector workers, those who are near-poor but do not meet various benchmarks to be considered impoverished, and migrant populations.1 The Joint Learning Network for Universal Health Coverage has developed a relevant report compiling lessons on how countries have ensured health coverage for non-poor, informal-sector workers. The populations who are facing financial access barriers will differ between contexts, but their identification will help decision-makers better understand gaps in existing financial protection systems.

    After identifying who is not accessing care for financial reasons, stakeholders must understand why. Most fundamentally, there may be no financial protection systems in place. Financial protection can encompass a number of approaches including but not limited to free care, reduced user fees, or health insurance. However, even in places where there are financial protection systems, these efforts may not adequately reach all populations or may not be designed with contextual realities in mind. For instance, a community project in Burundi - discussed in greater detail in “learn from others” - significantly reduced user fees to improve access to services. However, the financial realities of the target community were not adequately considered, and the reduced user fee still posed a substantial barrier for many individuals.2 In some instances, public sector transactional cash flow delays (such as those for facility reimbursement) may result in unexpected cash or supply shortages at the facility level. These shortages may be passed to the patients in the form of user fees or other costs. Thus, a benefit scheme must be designed and implemented with consideration of local realities in order to result in tangible and reliable improvements.   

    Out-of-pocket payments for care are not the only costs that patients incur when seeking care. Individuals may face prohibitive external or indirect costs related to seeking care such as transportation, lost wages from the patient and/or caretaker missing work to make an appointment, lodging, and childcare or elderly care costs.3 Thus, the cost of care reported by patients and by providers may be discordant. These external costs are less commonly addressed by health system-focused interventions despite posing significant barriers. When assessing the cost of care and catastrophic health expenditure, it is important to ensure that these indirect costs are considered.4

PHCPI is a partnership dedicated to transforming the global state of primary health care, beginning with better measurement. While the content in this report represents the position of the partnership as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any individual partner organization.

References:

  1. Braithwaite J, Hibbert P, Blakely B, Plumb J, Hannaford N, Long JC, et al. Health system frameworks and performance indicators in eight countries: A comparative international analysis. SAGE Open Med. 2017 Jan 4;5:2050312116686516.
  2. Flood D, Rohloff P. Indigenous languages and global health. Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6(2):e134–5.
  3. Dzakpasu S, Powell-Jackson T, Campbell OMR. Impact of user fees on maternal health service utilization and related health outcomes: a systematic review. Health Policy Plan. 2014 Mar;29(2):137–50.
  4. Lagarde M, Haines A, Palmer N. The impact of conditional cash transfers on health outcomes and use of health services in low and middle income countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 7;(4):CD008137.
  5. Mathauer I, Mathivet B, Kutzin J. Community Based Health Insurance: How can it contribute to progress towards UHC? 2017;(3):1–14.
  6. Characteristics of Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) Schemes [Internet]. The World Health Organization. [cited 2017 Aug 18]. Available from: http://www.who.int/health_financing/topics/community-based-health-insurance/key-characteristics/en/
  7. Ir P, Horemans D, Souk N, Van Damme W. Using targeted vouchers and health equity funds to improve access to skilled birth attendants for poor women: a case study in three rural health districts in Cambodia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010 Jan 7;10:1.
  8. Black RE, Taylor CE, Arole S, Bang A, Bhutta ZA, Chowdhury AMR, et al. Comprehensive review of the evidence regarding the effectiveness of community-based primary health care in improving maternal, neonatal and child health: 8. summary and recommendations of the Expert Panel. J Glob Health. 2017 Jun;7(1):010908.
  9. Mobile clinics provide health care to people in some of the world’s worst crises. The World Health Organization.
  10. Kulkayeva G. Using medical trains to improve access to health services across Kazakhstan. WHO collaborating centre for Integrated Health Services based on Primary Care. 2016.
  11. Santos LMP, Oliveira A, Trindade JS, Barreto IC, Palmeira PA, Comes Y, et al. Implementation research: towards universal health coverage with more doctors in Brazil. Bull World Health Organ. 2017 Feb 1;95(2):103–12.
  12. Campos GW de S, Pereira N. Primary care in Brazil, and the Mais Médicos (More Doctors) Program in the Unified Health System: achievements and limits. Cien Saude Colet. 2016 Sep;21(9):2655–63.
  13. Newbrander W, Ickx P, Feroz F, Stanekzai H. Afghanistan’s basic package of health services: its development and effects on rebuilding the health system. Glob Public Health. 2014 May 28;9 Suppl 1:S6-28.
  14. Sekhri N, Feachem R, Ni A. Public-private integrated partnerships demonstrate the potential to improve health care access, quality, and efficiency. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Aug;30(8):1498–507.
  15. The Global Health Group. Design and early operations of the Maseru public-private integrated partnership. 2013;(1):1–10.
  16. Project ECHO: Our Story. 2017 [cited 2017 Aug 23]; Available from: https://echo.unm.edu/about-echo/our-story/
  17. Hostetter M, Klein S, Mccarthy D. Project ECHO’s Complex Care Initiative: Building Capacity to Help “Superutilizers” in Underserved Communities. 2016;22.
  18. Gottlieb K. The Nuka System of Care: improving health through ownership and relationships. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2013 Aug 5;72.
  19. LeFevre AE, Mohan D, Hutchful D, Jennings L, Mehl G, Labrique A, et al. Mobile Technology for Community Health in Ghana: what happens when technical functionality threatens the effectiveness of digital health programs? BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017 Mar 14;17(1):27.
  20. Patel S, Koku Awoonor-Williams J, Asuru R, Boyer CB, Awopole Yepakeh Tiah J, Sheff MC, et al. Benefits and Limitations of a Community-Engaged Emergency Referral System in a Remote, Impoverished Setting of Northern Ghana. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2016 Dec 23;4(4):552–67.
  21. Management Sciences for Health. The Impact of Community-Based Health Insurance on Access to Care and Equity in Rwanda. 2016;(March):1–25.
  22. Umeh CA, Feeley FG. Inequitable Access to Health Care by the Poor in Community-Based Health Insurance Programs: A Review of Studies From Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2017 Jun 27;5(2):299–314.
  23. Lu C, Chin B, Lewandowski JL, Basinga P, Hirschhorn LR, Hill K, et al. Towards universal health coverage: an evaluation of Rwanda Mutuelles in its first eight years. PLoS ONE. 2012 Jun 18;7(6):e39282.
  24. Dhillon RS, Bonds MH, Fraden M, Ndahiro D, Ruxin J. The impact of reducing financial barriers on utilisation of a primary health care facility in Rwanda. Glob Public Health. 2012;7(1):71–86.
  25. Bodhisane S, Pongpanich S. The impact of community based health insurance in enhancing better accessibility and lowering the chance of having financial catastrophe due to health service utilization: A case study of savannakhet province, laos. Int J Health Serv. 2017;47(3):504–18.
  26. Bank TW. Community-Based Health Insurance in Lao P . D . R . Understanding Enrollment and Impacts. 2010;(November).
  27. Lambert-Evans S, Ponsar F, Reid T, Bachy C, Van Herp M, Philips M. Financial access to health care in Karuzi, Burundi: a household-survey based performance evaluation. Int J Equity Health. 2009 Oct 24;8:36.
  28. Steinhardt LC, Peters DH. Targeting accuracy and impact of a community-identified waiver card scheme for primary care user fees in Afghanistan. Int J Equity Health. 2010 Nov 29;9:28.
  29. Steinhardt LC, Aman I, Pakzad I, Kumar B, Singh LP, Peters DH. Removing user fees for basic health services: a pilot study and national roll-out in Afghanistan. Health Policy Plan. 2011 Nov;26 Suppl 2:ii92-103.
  30. Pyone T, Smith H, van den Broek N. Implementation of the free maternity services policy and its implications for health system governance in Kenya. BMJ Glob Health. 2017 Nov 12;2(4):e000249.
  31. Randive B, Diwan V, De Costa A. India’s Conditional Cash Transfer Programme (the JSY) to Promote Institutional Birth: Is There an Association between Institutional Birth Proportion and Maternal Mortality? PLoS ONE. 2013 Jun 27;8(6):e67452.
  32. Barber SL, Gertler PJ. Empowering women to obtain high quality care: evidence from an evaluation of Mexico’s conditional cash transfer programme. Health Policy Plan. 2009 Jan;24(1):18–25.