↓ Skip to main content

Challenges of medicines management in the public and private sector under Ghana’s National Health Insurance Scheme – A qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 517)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
202 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Challenges of medicines management in the public and private sector under Ghana’s National Health Insurance Scheme – A qualitative study
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40545-016-0055-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul G. Ashigbie, Devine Azameti, Veronika J. Wirtz

Abstract

Ghana established its National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in 2003 with the goal of ensuring more equitable financing of health care to improve access to health services. This qualitative study examines the challenges and consequences of medicines management policies and practices under the NHIS as perceived by public and private service providers. This study was conducted in health facilities in the Eastern, Greater Accra and Volta regions of Ghana between July and August 2014. We interviewed 26 Key Informants (KIs) from a purposively selected sample of public and private sector providers (government and mission hospitals, private hospitals and private standalone pharmacies), pharmaceutical suppliers and NHIS district offices. Data was collected using semi-structured interview guides which covered facility accreditation, reimbursement practices, medicines selection, purchasing and pricing of medicines, and utilization of medicines. Codes for data analysis were developed based on the study questions and also in response to themes that emerged from the transcripts and notes. Most KIs agreed that the introduction of the NHIS has increased access to and utilization of medicines by removing cost barriers for patients; however, some pointed out the increased utilization could also be corollary to moral hazard. Common concerns across all facilities were the delays in receiving NHIS reimbursements, and low reimbursement rates for medicines which result in providers asking patients to pay supplementary fees. KIs reported important differences between private and public sectors including weak separation of prescribing and dispensing and limited use of drugs and therapeutic committees in the private sector, the disproportionate effects of unfavorable reimbursement prices for medicines, and inadequate participation of the private sector providers (especially pharmacies and licensed chemical sellers) in the NHIS. Health providers generally perceive the NHIS to have had a largely positive impact on access to medicines. However, concerns remain about equity in access to medicines and the differences in quality of pharmaceutical care delivered by private and public providers. Routine monitoring of medicines use during the implementation of health insurance schemes is important to identify and address the potential consequences of medicines policies and practices under the scheme.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 <1%
Unknown 201 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 18%
Researcher 31 15%
Student > Postgraduate 24 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Other 40 20%
Unknown 40 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 16%
Social Sciences 28 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 7%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 47 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,595,921
of 25,455,127 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#27
of 517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,825
of 313,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,455,127 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.