An Application of the RTM Framework to Understand Primary Health Care in Nigeria

Daniel H. Kress, Hong Wang and Yanfang Su

Chapter 14 in Tracking Resources for Primary Health Care:A Framework and Practices in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, 2020, pp 345-363 from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

Abstract: The following sections are included:This framework provides a conceptually coherent approach to understanding how well (or poorly) resources are being generated and converted into medical and public health services, ideally with a strong emphasis on serving the poor.Applying this framework to the overall picture of health care financing in Nigeria suggests considerable challenges and room for improvement.Resource mobilization: Government health spending as a share of total government spending is only 5% and government health spending as a share of total health spending is 13%. As a consequence, private out-of-pocket spending constitutes 75% of total health expenditure (THE).Resource allocation: Hospitals and health administration capture a very large share of government health expenditure, 48% for hospitals and 44% for health system administration and financing, which leaves little for ambulatory and preventive care. Local governments are largely responsible for paying for PHC.Resource utilization: As in many countries, capital budgets are chronically underutilized. Recurrent budgets are generally spent since most recurrent costs are consumed by salaries and, in fact, a large part of government health spending is consumed by salary costs.Resource productivity: Resource productivity is quite low in Nigeria as evidenced by the low rate of consultation at PHC levels. What is notable is that overall levels of human resources in Nigeria are close to WHO norms. The picture is one where low levels of government financing force PHC facilities to impose user fees on clients, lowering consultations. Providers at the PHC level end up seeing very few patients. The low level of public financing also impacts resource productivity in other ways, through absenteeism, drug and equipment shortages, and low levels of provider knowledge.Resource targeting: Resource targeting is poor for several reasons. First, government health spending is focused on hospitals and administration, which predominantly benefit the urban and wealthy. Second, the de facto policy of allowing user fees at the primary level means that poor and rural populations have to pay for care, which few do as they choose instead to not seek care or to seek care in the private sector. In either case, public spending does not benefit the poor.The analysis from an application of the RTM framework suggests some promising reforms such as greater demand-side financing, strengthening fiscal policy, health financing pilots that reward results, and induce shifts in financing across tertiary, secondary, and primary care levels.

Keywords: Health Financing; Public Financial Management; Resource Tracking; Health Economics; Health Policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I14 I15 I18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789811212413_0014 (application/pdf)
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789811212413_0014 (text/html)
Ebook Access is available upon purchase.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wsi:wschap:9789811212413_0014

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in World Scientific Book Chapters from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Tai Tone Lim ().