Contraception · 2010
The promise of affordable implants: is cost recovery possible in Kenya?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tumlinson Katherine, Steiner Markus J, Rademacher Kate H, Olawo Alice, Solomon Marsden, Bratt John
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Contraceptive implants are one of the most effective methods of family planning but remain underutilized due to their relatively high upfront cost. The increasing availability of a low-cost implant may reduce financial barriers and increase uptake of implants. The commodity cost of Sino-implant (II) is approximately 60% less than two other widely available implants, and a direct service delivery cost of approximately US$12 makes it one of the most cost-effective methods available. This study was conducted to assess whether implant clients in Kenya are paying as much or more than the direct service delivery cost of Sino-implant (II).
STUDY DESIGN: A study was conducted in 22 facilities throughout Kenya, including public (n=8), private for-profit (n=6) and private not-for-profit facilities (n=8). Interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 293 current and returning implant clients after at least 6 months of product use.
RESULTS: The median price for implant insertion paid by clients in the public, private for-profit and private not-for-profit sectors was US$1.30, US$13.30 and US$20.00, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Patient fees in both private sectors allow for 100% recovery of the direct cost of providing Sino-implant (II). Currently in Kenya, all sectors can receive donated commodities free of charge; Sino-implant (II) has the potential to reduce reliance on donor-supplied implants and thereby improve contraceptive security.
STUDY DESIGN: A study was conducted in 22 facilities throughout Kenya, including public (n=8), private for-profit (n=6) and private not-for-profit facilities (n=8). Interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 293 current and returning implant clients after at least 6 months of product use.
RESULTS: The median price for implant insertion paid by clients in the public, private for-profit and private not-for-profit sectors was US$1.30, US$13.30 and US$20.00, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Patient fees in both private sectors allow for 100% recovery of the direct cost of providing Sino-implant (II). Currently in Kenya, all sectors can receive donated commodities free of charge; Sino-implant (II) has the potential to reduce reliance on donor-supplied implants and thereby improve contraceptive security.