Benjamin Uzochukwu

OBJECTIVE: We examine socio-economic status (SES) and geographic differences in willingness of respondents to pay for community-based health insurance (CBHI). METHODS: The study took place in Anambra and Enugu states, south-east Nigeria. It involved a rural, an urban and a semi-urban community in each of the two states. A pre-tested interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect information from a total of 3070 households selected by simple random sampling. Contingent valuation was used to elicit willingness to pay (WTP) using the bidding game format. Data were examined for correlation between SES and geographic locations with WTP. Log ordinary least squares (OLS) was used to examine the construct validity of elicited WTP. RESULTS: Generally, less than 40% of the respondents were willing to pay for CBHI membership for themselves or other household members. The proportions of people who were willing to pay were much lower in the rural communities, at less than 7%. The average that respondents were willing to pay as a monthly premium for themselves ranged from 250 Naira (US$1.7) in a rural community to 343 Naira (US$2.9) in an urban community. The higher the SES group, the higher the stated WTP amount. Similarly, the urbanites stated higher WTP compared with peri-urban and rural dwellers. Males and people with more education stated higher WTP values than females and those with less education. Log OLS also showed that previously paying out-of-pocket for health care was negatively related to WTP. Previously paying for health care using any health insurance mechanism was positively related to WTP. CONCLUSION: Economic status and place of residence amongst other factors matter in peoples' WTP for CBHI membership. Consumer awareness has to be created about the benefits of CBHI, especially in rural areas, and the amount to be paid has to be augmented with other means of financing (e.g. government and/or donor subsidies) to ensure success and sustainability of CBHI schemes.

OBJECTIVE: Using uniform thresholds and a set of variable threshold levels, this study examined the incidence of catastrophe amongst households of different socio-economic status (SES) quintiles. METHODS: A household diary was used to collect illness and household consumption expenditure data from 1128 households over 1 month. Catastrophic health expenditure was examined based on uniform threshold levels of non-food expenditure and a novel set of variable thresholds in which the levels for various SES groups were weighted by the ratio of household expenditure on food. RESULTS: A total of 167 households (14.8%) experienced catastrophe at a non-food expenditure threshold of 40%, with 22.6% and 7.6% of the poorest and richest household quintiles experiencing catastrophe. For the first set of variable scenarios, the thresholds for the poorest and richest household quintiles were 5% and 29.6% and levels of catastrophe were 44.7% and 12.0%, respectively, while the overall level was 36.5%. In the second scenario, the thresholds were 6.8% and 40%, and the levels of catastrophe were 42.5% and 7.6%, respectively, while the overall level was 32.0%. CONCLUSIONS: High levels of catastrophic expenditure exist in Nigeria. Use of variable thresholds to measure catastrophe led to higher overall and disaggregated levels of catastrophe. Such a measure is argued to be more appropriate for the examination of catastrophe.

BACKGROUND: Equitable improvement of treatment-seeking for malaria will depend partly on how different socio-economic groups perceive the ease of accessing and utilizing malaria treatment services from different healthcare providers. Hence, it was important to investigate the link between socioeconomic status (SES) with differences in perceptions of ease of accessing and receiving treatment as well as with actual health seeking for treatment of malaria from different providers. METHODS: Structured questionnaires were used to collect data from 1,351 health providers in four malaria-endemic communities in Enugu state, southeast Nigeria. Data was collected on the peoples' perceptions of ease of accessibility and utilization of different providers of malaria treatment using a pre-tested questionnaire. A SES index was used to examine inequities in perceptions and health seeking. RESULTS: Patent medicine dealers (vendors) were the most perceived easily accessible providers, followed by private hospitals/clinics in two communities with full complement of healthcare providers: public hospital in the community with such a health provider and traditional healers in a community that is devoid of public healthcare facilities. There were inequities in perception of accessibility and use of different providers. There were also inequity in treatment-seeking for malaria and the poor spend proportionally more to treat the disease. CONCLUSION: Inequities exist in how different SES groups perceive the levels of ease of accessibility and utilization of different providers for malaria treatment. The differentials in perceptions of ease of access and use as well as health seeking for different malaria treatment providers among SES groups could be decreased by reducing barriers such as the cost of treatment by making health services accessible, available and at reduced cost for all groups.

Logic models (LMs) have been used in programme evaluation for over four decades. Current debate questions the ability of logic modelling techniques to incorporate contextual factors into logic models. We share experience of developing a logic model within an ongoing realist evaluation which assesses the extent to which, and under what circumstances a community health workers (CHW) programme promotes access to maternity services in Nigeria. The article contributes to logic modelling debate by: i) reflecting on how other scholars captured context during LM development in theory-driven evaluations; and ii) explaining how we explored context during logic model development for realist evaluation of the CHW programme in Nigeria. Data collection methods that informed our logic model development included documents review, email discussions and teleconferences with programme stakeholders and a technical workshop with researchers to clarify programme goals and untangle relationships among programme elements. One of the most important findings is that, rather than being an end in itself, logic model development is an essential step for identifying initial hypotheses for tentative relevant contexts, mechanisms and outcomes (CMOs) and CMO configurations of how programmes produce change. The logic model also informed development of a methodology handbook that is guiding verification and consolidation of underlying programme theories.