TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of medicine availability measurements at health facilities
T2 - Evidence from Service Provision Assessment surveys in five sub-Saharan African countries
AU - Choi, Yoonjoung
AU - Ametepi, Paul
N1 - Funding Information:
SPA is a national-level survey of formal sector health facilities, providing comprehensive data on availability of services at facilities, readiness of facilities to provide essential health services, and quality of care. SPA is conducted as part of the MEASURE Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) project, supported by the US Agency for International Development [11]. Standardized methodologies and instruments are used, providing comparable data across time and countries. As with other surveys under the project, MEASURE DHS provides technical assistance to host country implementing partners to conduct the assessment, ensuring data quality and comparability, and SPA data are freely available to the public [11].
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - Background: With growing emphasis on health systems strengthening in global health, various health facility assessment methods have been used increasingly to measure medicine and commodity availability. However, few studies have systematically compared estimates of availability based on different definitions. The objective of this study was to compare estimates of medicine availability based on different definitions. Methods. A secondary data analysis was conducted using data from the Service Provision Assessment (SPA) - a nationally representative sample survey of health facilities - conducted in five countries: Kenya SPA 2010, Namibia SPA 2009, Rwanda SPA 2007, Tanzania SPA 2006, and Uganda SPA 2007. For 32 medicines, percent of facilities having the medicine were estimated using five definitions: four for current availability and one for six-month period availability. 'Observed availability of at least one valid unit' was used as a reference definition, and ratios between the reference and each of the other four estimates were calculated. Summary statistics of the ratios among the 32 medicines were calculated by country. The ratios were compared further between public and non-public facilities within each country. Results: Across five countries, compared to current observed availability of at least one valid unit, 'reported availability without observation' was on average 6% higher (ranging from 3% in Rwanda to 8% in Namibia), 'observed availability where all units were valid' was 11% lower (ranging from 2% in Tanzania to 19% in Uganda), and 'six-month period availability' was 14% lower (ranging from 5% in Namibia to 25% in Uganda). Conclusions: Medicine availability estimates vary substantially across definitions, and need to be interpreted with careful consideration of the methods used.
AB - Background: With growing emphasis on health systems strengthening in global health, various health facility assessment methods have been used increasingly to measure medicine and commodity availability. However, few studies have systematically compared estimates of availability based on different definitions. The objective of this study was to compare estimates of medicine availability based on different definitions. Methods. A secondary data analysis was conducted using data from the Service Provision Assessment (SPA) - a nationally representative sample survey of health facilities - conducted in five countries: Kenya SPA 2010, Namibia SPA 2009, Rwanda SPA 2007, Tanzania SPA 2006, and Uganda SPA 2007. For 32 medicines, percent of facilities having the medicine were estimated using five definitions: four for current availability and one for six-month period availability. 'Observed availability of at least one valid unit' was used as a reference definition, and ratios between the reference and each of the other four estimates were calculated. Summary statistics of the ratios among the 32 medicines were calculated by country. The ratios were compared further between public and non-public facilities within each country. Results: Across five countries, compared to current observed availability of at least one valid unit, 'reported availability without observation' was on average 6% higher (ranging from 3% in Rwanda to 8% in Namibia), 'observed availability where all units were valid' was 11% lower (ranging from 2% in Tanzania to 19% in Uganda), and 'six-month period availability' was 14% lower (ranging from 5% in Namibia to 25% in Uganda). Conclusions: Medicine availability estimates vary substantially across definitions, and need to be interpreted with careful consideration of the methods used.
KW - Health facility assessment
KW - Health systems
KW - Medicine availability
KW - Survey methodology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880006854&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880006854&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/1472-6963-13-266
DO - 10.1186/1472-6963-13-266
M3 - Article
C2 - 23837467
AN - SCOPUS:84880006854
SN - 1472-6963
VL - 13
JO - BMC health services research
JF - BMC health services research
IS - 1
M1 - 266
ER -