Following the January
25th revolution, Egypt’s health sector started a period of
transition which will be difficult to define how long it will take. Since then, three Ministers were in charge with
no success of being approved by the public or health sector staff posing an
immense challenge for whoever will be in charge during the transition. Dissatisfaction is due to presence of high
expectations, absence of priority setting on few areas that could be
accomplished, and absence of indicators to measure success of a transition.
This
transition is expected to be followed by a third wave of reform. Lack of presence of strategic directions for a
potential third wave of reform will hinder efforts to design and implement the
transition. A third wave of reform will
be expected if we will look backwards at history of reform Egypt encountered. Reform
phases could be classified as; (i) Pre-reform phase (before 1997) focusing on
improving maternal/child health and fertility outcomes; (ii) First Reform Wave
(1997-2005) focused on universal coverage through adopting a national health
system; and (iii) Second Reform Wave (2006-2010) focused on expanding universal
coverage through adopting social health insurance.
Pre-reform
Phase (Before 1997)
This phase
focused on improving health outcomes at primary health care targeting
improvements in maternal and child health as well as fertility outcomes
implemented by a number of vertical programs at primary health care level. Efforts
towards efficiency focused on integration of child health services at primary
health care level and on cost recovery at hospital care level, while efforts
towards universal coverage and protection focused on expanding health insurance
coverage, compulsory to school children and voluntary to pre-school
children.
The First Wave
of Health Reform (1997-2005).
Irrespective
of its original design, this wave adopted a national health system (NHS)
approach to achieve universal coverage – starting a pilot in five governorates. It was led by the Ministry of Health (MoH),
which was convenient given the ministry’s familiarity with NHS considering this
reform as a natural continuation of its original work. On the other hand, the Health Insurance
Organization (HIO), which also was envisaged to be reformed, was not much
involved and continued its role as originally assigned to it. This phase introduced: (i) Family Health Services
and its accreditation; (ii) needs based health facility planning; and (iii) payment
for performance using Family Health Funds partially, an attempt to separate provision
of services from its management. Training
of health workforce and quality were key factors increasing utilization, while user
fees reversed gains in utilization.
The Second
Wave of Reform (2006-2010)
This phase adopted
a social health insurance system (SHI) approach to achieve universal
coverage - starting a pilot in one governorate; however, design was developed “as
we go” and with a tendency to be conservative in expanding coverage. The characteristic explicit shift in strategy
from NHS to SHI was based on a policy paper prepared by the previous National
Democratic Party (NDP), followed by a Presidential declaration in Sohag in 2005.
This shift forced a new stakeholder, the
Ministry of Finance (MoF), to have a significant role in decision making during
this phase. This phase was partially led
by HIO, with difficulties to reach consensus and the recognition for the need
of additional studies to understand the fiscal implications of SHI on the
budget. Regretfully, a number of features
developed under the first wave were dropped along the way.
The Transition
We are now in a transitional period,
before a third wave of reform starts. It
might be prudent during this period to set modest objectives for this phase instead
of trying to reform the whole system or passing critical laws such as SHI law. It might be worthy to reach consent on the health system that would reflect the values of the people before embarking on Egypt’s third wave of reform. Two
sets of questions will need to be posed:
Are
the people willing to accommodate the
idea that reform will take longer than what they would expect, and are they willing to work in stages or phases with realistic
objectives instead of full blown reforms?
If so,
What would be the priorities for the
transition period and its minimum objectives, and how to measure its success?
Two areas of
priority could be identified to be demanded by the people and health sector
staff during transition. These are:
(1)
Governance and Anticorruption
(2)
Health Workforce.
These are two broad areas that need
to be further defined to ensure feasibility and successful implementation and to fairly
hold a Minister of Health accountable for his or her performance of this period. Improvements in these two areas could reflect substantially on improvement in the provision of health care that could be favorably received by the people.
Until we meet again....
No comments:
Post a Comment