View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk
brought to you by
CORE
provided by eCommons@AKU
eCommons@AKU
Community Health Sciences
Department of Community Health Sciences
October 2009
National Health Accounts: lessons for Pakistan.
ashar muhammad malik
Aga Khan University,
[email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://ecommons.aku.edu/pakistan_fhs_mc_chs_chs
Part of the Family Medicine Commons, and the Public Health Commons
Recommended Citation
malik, a. m. (2009). National Health Accounts: lessons for Pakistan.. JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 59(10),
712-716.
Available at: http://ecommons.aku.edu/pakistan_fhs_mc_chs_chs/300
Review Article
National Health Accounts: lessons for Pakistan
Muhammad Ashar Malik
Department of Community Health Sciences, Aga Khan University, Stadium Road, Karachi, Pakistan.
Introduction
National Health accounts (NHA) is a resource
tracking exercise which primarily answers some
important questions regarding the healthcare financing
and economics in a country. It is a financial tracking of
healthcare system of a country over a specified period of
time. It is a comprehensive set of data of flow of funds in
to the healthcare system in the country i.e. source and use
of funds. It has a well demonstrated use as a tool for
decision making for optimal resource allocation for health
care. Importance of financial resources in health policy
and reforms is well recognized. As such the health
expenditure tracking and analysis has been carried out
since early 1960s in developed and developing countries.
In developed countries, maintaining the expenditure data
for healthcare over the last many decades is an accepted
practice. More and more countries are now compiling
health accounts data which includes many developing
countries. Presently, there are 68 countries which have
carried out national health accounts either one or many
rounds.1 Pakistan's neighbouring countries such as China,
India, Iran, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka have also
completed one or more rounds of national health
accounts.
Use of evidence in health policy and practice in
developing countries is vague due to two reasons; either
Vol. 59, No. 10, October 2009
available evidence is not relevant to local settings or
simply there is no evidence. The case of healthcare
financing in Pakistan is one such example where very
little data is available. Although there are claims of 1) low
spending on health by government, 2) emphasis on
curative services and 3) urban bias in resource allocation,
but these claims are based on vague definition of health
expenditure, incomplete financial data and slack
compilation of financial records of public and private
healthcare. The reason is simple; little importance is
given to healthcare financing and economics while
developing health policy and practice.
Nature and scope of Health Accounts:
NHA provide a detailed functional (e.g.
preventive vs. curative services allocation and
expenditure) and object classification (e.g. salaries,
medicines, equipment and building) of financial data into
different sources (federal ministry, other government,
state owned enterprises, private insurance plans and
households) and user (rich, middle class or poor, and
urban and rural etc).3
The expenditure data on healthcare is a key
priority area for healthcare policy and planning at the
government level as well as by other stakeholders like
development partners, insurance companies, private
712
business and even the households. Although NHA is a key
resource for evidence based policy and reforms, but it can
only be better utilized with other important data such as
outcomes of health policy and planning. NHA dataset,
along with other data on outputs and utilization of health
care services, can determine the responsiveness of the
health system to the population needs of healthcare.
Important parameters on health system performance,
efficiency of investment, beneficiary analysis and level of
horizontal and vertical equity can be determined too.
These analyses can provide a sound foundation for
priorities setting and redirecting resources to the direly
needed areas of healthcare.
Methods for carrying out National Health
Accounts:
History of tracking health expenditure is traced
back to early 1930s.2 Systematic efforts for compiling
health expenditure, with the aim to refine health policies
and for international comparison, have been started in
early 1960s. Since then NHA methodology has evolved
towards a standard common framework, capable for
country level analysis and regional and international
comparisons. Now a days, the most common
methodology for establishing NHA is the System of
Health Accounts (SHA) of 2000, developed by the
Organization for Economic Cooperation for Development
(OECD) secretariat. A recent adaptation of SHA is that
developed jointly by the WHO, The World Bank (WB)
and the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID).3 Some of the key features of this
manual are broadening the definition of health
expenditure by including the health infrastructure
development and the expenditure on traditional
medicines. WHO NHA methodology is quite similar to
the SHA methodology. However, this adaptation goes
beyond OECD SHA with a more detailed breakdown of
source and use; which could be critical due to pluralistic
nature of healthcare systems in developing countries, and
are similar to the United States, for instance.4
The real methodological challenge in the NHA
creation is defining the term health expenditure. The
standard definition of health expenditure is provided by
the WHO manual as any expenditure whose primary
purpose is to improve health. However, different
countries elaborate this definition with different
approaches. This grossly affects the total expenditures on
health besides other detail breakup. Similarly, in the cross
country comparison as well as comparison to the previous
estimates of health expenditure it can lead to different
analysis and conclusion. For example, in India the NHA
estimates of total health expenditure as percentage of
713
GDP in the year 2002 was 6.1%,5 compared to previous
estimate of study estimated health expenditure as 4.8% of
GDP during 2002.6 Similarly in Thailand, the NHA
estimate of total health expenditure was 3.56% of GDP
during 1994 compared to previous estimate of 5.1% of
GDP.7 In case of Pakistan a specific mention would be the
inter provincial variation in expenditure reporting of the
public health sector. Unlike the rest of the country in
Sindh province the expenditure incurred on medical
education is partly reported with the Education
department. If expenditure on medical education is
considered as health expenditure then the expenditure
specifically meant for medical colleges shall be added to
the total public health expenditure in Sindh. Otherwise
the expenditure incurred on medical education by the
provincial health departments should be excluded from
the expenditure on health.
The National Health Accounts are similar in
approach and data sources of national income accounts.
However, the main difference in the two is the objective
achieved through them. While the NHA considers the
spending on health, the national accounts take the
production activities of the economy in entirety including
health.3,4 In order to distinguish it from national income
accounts, sometimes NHA has also been named as
national health expenditure accounts8 or health resource
tracking.9 Another difference between the two could be
that the National accounts (in many cases) use the
approach satellite accounts / T accounts (separate
tabulation of source (right side) and use (left side) of the
T table while the National health accounts adopts a source
and use matrix framework, where source(horizontal) and
use(vertical) of health resources makes one matrix.4
Resources required for NHA:
National health accounts mainly and ideally rely
on the secondary data sources. This mainly reduces the
cost and time required to produce NAH estimates.
Moreover secondary data source has also long term
sustainable effects. This fact to align NHA methodology
with the National Accounts and household survey is more
pressing in developing countries. The WHO manual
recommends that an initial round of NHA should cost
between US$ 50000 to US$ 75000.
The National health accounts needs diverse expertise
from economics, health, accounting and statistical
perspectives. As such it will require expertise in the field of
national income accounting and statistics. The team of NHA
should also have experts from the health sector with in-depth
knowledge of healthcare system in the country. Specific to
mention is the necessity to include a Health Economist in the
team even if it is available on short term basis.
J Pak Med Assoc
Regional and international experiences of
NHA:
NHAs have been built upon a diverse experience
as far as its commissioning and housing is concerned.
However, in majority of cases, the NHA have been
commissioned as well as produced by the ministry of
health. A survey of 21 countries in the Asia Pacific region
reveals the trend of commissioning NHA by the ministries
of health is most common. Similarly, the technical
production of NHA has also been characterized primarily
by ministries of health followed by the public sector
research agencies and national statistics agencies.10 A
review of different countries (some OECD and regional
countries) experience with NHA is summarized in the
Table. Nonetheless, an important issue in developing
this phenomenon and asking the policy makers for more
efficient deployment of the scarce resources for the
greater benefit of the whole society. In developing
countries, resource constraints are more severe, therefore
decision making needs more rigorous and robust evidence
on health care financing patterns. A more recent entry to
this agenda is the effectiveness of the aid provided by the
donors to the developing countries. NHA data can be used
to perform an analysis which will determine equity and
efficiency levels of investment in healthcare in a
country 11,12 as well as regional 13 and international
comparison.14 Such analysis can help to reformulate and
reorient the policy direction and carry out healthcare
reforms. Findings of NHA in 1999 in Tanzania, led the
government to enhance its role of stewardship in
Table: Countries with creation of NHA experience.
Country
Institution commissioned and produced the most recent round of NHA
Australia19
Germany20
Canada21
South Korea22
Australian institute of Health and Welfare
Federal Statistics Office
Canadian Institute of Health Information
Ministry of Health and Welfare Korean Institute of Health and Social Affairs,
University of Yonsei, Seoul
Health Economics Unit, Ministry of Health Bangladesh and Data International
Department of Health planning, Ministry of Health, Nepal
Plan and Budget Organization, Ministry of Health and Medical Education
and Statistical Centre, Iran
National Health Accounts Cell of Ministry of Health with WHO collaboration
Ministry of Health and Institute of Policy Study, Sri Lanka
Bangladesh23
Nepal24
Iran25
India5
Sri Lanka26
countries is the sustainability of NHA. Unlike the
developed countries, where NHA data is available in a
time series, developing countries struggle for making this
exercise consistent. In many countries, only a few rounds
of NHA have been carried out no matter where they are
constituted. However, even one and two rounds of NHA
have demonstrated effectiveness for better policy
programmes and reforms in health sector as mentioned
earlier. Similarly, timeliness of producing data is a critical
factor for the policy use of the findings of NHAs. A more
recent example is from Indonesia, where the reliable
estimates of NHA have yet to be compiled but due to the
urgency of need of financial analysis of health sector, a
public expenditure review has been carried out in 2008.
Use of NHA in Health Policy and Reforms:
Sound health policy requires sound evidence on
finances, utilization and output of healthcare system.
Spending on healthcare is increasing across the world due
to immense financial pressures on healthcare system. In
developed countries, taxpayers are showing concern for
Vol. 59, No. 10, October 2009
Rounds of NHA
Since Early 60s to 2002
1992-2001
1961-1999
-2002
Two (1996/97 & 1996-01)
One (1997)
Two (1997/98 & 2001)
One (2001) completed in 2005
Three (1995-2002)
healthcare, because 23% of the donors' contribution was
channeled bypassing the government of Tanzania.
Similarly in Egypt, NHA findings showed that the poor
are contributing a higher portion of their income to
healthcare than the rich; while in terms of utilization the
situation was inverse. On the basis of these findings, the
primary health care in Egypt has been reformed.15 In
Rwanda, the NHA study carried out in 1998 showed
excessive out of pocket expenditure on HIV/AIDS.16
These findings afterwards paved the way for introducing
pre-payment schemes for the poor and hence resulted in
an increased utilization of health services.17
Lessons for Pakistan:
Demand for producing National Health Accounts
in Pakistan has long been stressed by different
stakeholders in the health sector. Initially it has been
mentioned in the project documents (PC-1) of the national
health policy Unit of Ministry of Health. Afterwards staff
of NHPU was also sent for training abroad. But the
National Health Accounts were never produced and the
714
resources committed remained unutilized. However the
need for NHA remained critical. It was reflected as key
agenda whereever the healthcare financing issues and
challenges were discussed in the Pakistan context.18
A recent development in this regard is that the
Government of Pakistan has signed a Memorandum of
Understanding with a donor agency for carrying out first
ever National Health Accounts of Pakistan through the
Federal Bureau of Statistics. The FBS has secured a
grant from a bilateral agency namely German Technical
cooperation (GTZ) to conduct National Health Accounts
study in Pakistan. But housing NHA in FBS has also
created a difference of opinion among the two
government agencies. While the FBS has secured the
foreign funds and have started initial work staff
recruitment and mapping of healthcare schemes. The
Ministry of Health advocates that it was the activity of
Ministry of Health. The ministry stance seems rational
but weakened due to its inability to produce NHA
despite considerable lapse of time. Though FBS has
taken the lead in producing NHA, it neither has the legal
mandate to analyze and review the financial
performance of health ministry and health sector in
general nor does it have the capacity to analyze and
extract policy recommendation from NHA data. On the
other hand accessing data relating to health in niche and
corner in the country is the mandate of the FBS under an
act of parliament and not ministry of health e.g. the
ministry of health will be in a difficult position when
asked to access the health expenditure data of the armed
forces of Pakistan, while it will be much easier for FBS
to access such information. As such bringing the two key
stakeholders of NHA to some sort of agreement on this
issue will be crucial for the success of first ever round of
NHA in the country. Below are some corrective
measures for better coordination for a successful round
of NHA.
1. The Steering committee constituted by the FBS
for NHA should be revisited. It should ideally be headed
by the Ministry of Health with membership from FBS,
NHPU, civil society and planning commission. Based on
the lessons learnt from other countries, especially the
regional practices, it is evident that from commissioning
to production and use of NHA, ministries of health played
a lead role.
2. The approved PC-1 for the NHA of the FBS
needs to be revised to include the most important and
ultimate goals of the NHA i.e. Data analysis and policy
recommendation. Ministry of Health should be made
accountable
for
producing
timely
policy
715
recommendations based on the findings of NHA. Based
on the WHO recommendation for cost of this exercise the
present funds i.e.1 million Euros are more than sufficient
to complete the task by funding both the arms of this
study.
3. FBS should be allowed to continue the data
collection and compilation. However the minute
functional boundaries between preventive and curative
care, private and public expenditure, direct government
expenditure on healthcare would need careful and
elaborated efforts. MoH can take lead on this aspect by
providing technical expertise to the FBS in the field of
public health.
4. Lastly it is important for sustainability and
consistency in the NHA, to develop a team of local
experts which can carry out this exercise even after
exhausting the foreign aid. This would necessitate a
human resource development at two fronts; in the FBS as
well as in the MoH to carry forward the NHA data for
further analysis and policy recommendation. Only then,
the ultimate goal of NHA will be achieved.
Producing a comprehensive, comparable, timely,
and accurate and more importantly a policy relevant data
set is a big challenge for the government. Secondly,
appropriate analysis of NHA data for policy and reforms
usage and later on the continuation of this exercise at least
with some interval would remain questionable. This
requires some concrete measures and political
commitment at the very outset of this exercise. The
ultimate user of the NHA is MoH, for a better policy
making and need based planning for the health sector.
Therefore, MoH and FSB should join hands with more
commitment for making first round of NHA a fruitful and
policy relevant document.
Conclusion
National Health Accounts have demonstrated
significant impact on better policy development and in a
major shift in health policy for better healthcare. NHA
has evidently provided more refined estimates, rejecting
previous perception about health expenditure. As such in
Pakistan claims such as low expenditure on healthcare,
urban bias in resource allocation and emphasis on
curative services, can only be advocated if supported by
NHA data. A robust and comprehensive data set based on
systematically chalked out framework can provide bases
for an evidence-based health policy and reform agenda
for better utilization of already scarce resource in
Pakistan. A great deal of ownership and dedicated efforts
of the key stakeholders only would make this dream
come true!
J Pak Med Assoc
Acknowledgement
I am grateful to Dr. Babar T. Shaikh, Assistant
Professor, Community Health Sciences Department, Aga
Khan University, for reviewing and editing the drafts of
this paper and Dr. Fauziah Rabbani Associate Professor,
Community Health Sciences Department, Aga Khan
University, Karachi for guidance.
Sector in Nepal. Nepal, Ministry of Health, 2003.
13.
Data International, Nepal Health Economics Association, and Institute of
Policy Studies. Equity in Financing and Delivery of Health Services in
Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka. Colombo, Sri Lanka, Institute of Policy
Studies, June 2001.
14.
van Doorslaer, Eddy, Wagstaffe A, Rutten F, eds. Equity in the Finance and
Delivery of Health Care: An International Perspective. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1993.
15.
De Susna, Dmytraczenko T, Brinkerhoff D, Tien M. Has Improved
Availability of Health Expenditure Data Contributed to Evidence-Based
Policymaking? Country Experience with National Health Accounts,
Technical Report No. 022. Bethesda, MD, The Partners for Health Reform
plus Project, Abt Associates Inc., May 2003.
References
1.
WHO. Strategy on health care financing for countries of the Western
Pacific and South-East Asia Regions (2006-2010). Geneva: World Health
Organization, 2005.
16.
2.
Anonymous. The Committee on the costs of medical care presents its final
report, The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly Bulletin 1933; 11: 21-30.
Schneider P, Nandakumar AK, Porignon D, Bhawalkar M, Butera D.
Rwanda National Health Accounts 1998 (Technical Report No. 53).
Partnerships for Health Reform (PHR), September 2000.
17.
3.
WHO. A guide to producing National Health Accounts, with special
application for low and middle income countries. Geneva: World Health
Organization, 2003.
Schneider P, Schott W, Bhawalkar M, Nandakumar AK, Diop F, Butera D.
Paying for HIV/AIDS services. UNAIDS Best Practice Collection, Geneva,
UNAIDS, UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA, UNDCP, ILO, UNESCO, WHO,
World Bank, 2001.
4.
Berman PA. National Health Accounts in Developing Countries:
appropriate methods and recent application. Health Econ 1997; 6: 11-30.
18.
Nishtar S. Health Indicators of Pakistan- Gateway Paper II. Islamabad:
Heartfile, 2007.
5.
National Health Accounts Cell. National Health Accounts India, 2001-02.
New Delhi Ministry of Health and Welfare, 2005.
19.
6.
WHO. National Health Accounts, Country information. (Online) (Cited
2008 July 8). Available from URL: http://www.who.int/nha/country/.
Ingham L, Bennetts R, Haynes T. SHA- Based Health Accounts of 13
Countries- country studies- Australia: National Health Accounts, OECD
Health Technical Papers, No.1. Paris, OECD Publications, 2004.
20.
7.
Tangcharoensathien V, Laixuthai A, Vasavit J, Tantigate N, PrajaubmohRuffolo W, Vimolkit D, et al. National Health Accounts Development:
Lessons from Thailand, Health Policy Plan 1999; 14: 342-53.
Zifonun N. SHA- Based Health Accounts of 13 Countries- country studiesGermany: National Health Accounts, OECD Health Technical Papers,
No.4. Paris, OECD Publications, 2004.
21.
Gilles F. SHA- Based Health Accounts of 13 Countries- country studiesCanada: National Health Accounts 1999, OECD Health Technical Papers,
No.2. Paris, OECD Publications, 2004.
22.
Jeong H. SHA- Based Health Accounts of 13 Countries- country studiesKorea: National Health Accounts 2001, OECD Health Technical Papers,
No.7. Paris, OECD Publications, 2004.
23.
Data International. Bangladesh National Health Accounts, 1999-2001.
Dhaka: Health Economics Unit, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
2003.
24.
Prasai DP, Karki D, Sharma TM, Ganwali D, Subedi GR, Singh AB. Nepal
National Health Accounts, 2001-03. Kathmandu, Ministry of Health and
Population, Health Economics Unit, 2006.
25.
World Bank. Iran National Health Accounts 1997-98. Partner for Health
Reforms (PHRPlus), Abt Associates,1998.
26.
Institute of Policy Studies. Sri Lanka National Health Accounts 2000-02.
Colombo, Ministry of Healthcare, Nutrition and Uva-Wellassa
Development, 2005.
8.
Cowan C A, Hartman B H. Financing Health Care: Businesses,
Households, and Governments, 1987-2003. Baltimore: Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services, July 2005 (Health care financing review
web
exclusive).
(Online)
Available
from
URL:
http://www.cms.hns.gov/apps/review/web_exclusives/cowan.pdf.
9.
Powel-Jackson T, Mills A. A review of health expenditure resource tracking
in developing countries. Health Policy Plan 2007; 22: 353-62.
10.
Eliya R, Ravi P. Status of National Health Accounts in Asia Pacific region:
Results of APNHAN Survey. Sri Lanka, Asia Pacific Network of National
Health Accounts, 2001.
11.
12.
Nandakumar AK, Nada K, Ibrahim A, Ezzat M, Latif MA, Sadiq A. Health
Expenditure Review: Technical Report No. 35, Alexandria, Egypt.
Bethesda, MD: Partnerships for Health Reform Project, Ab Associates Inc.
May 1999.
British Council, Kathmandu, Nepal and Health Economics and Financing
Unit, Ministry of Health Nepal. Public Expenditure Review of the Health
Vol. 59, No. 10, October 2009
716