Performance-based financing in Rwanda: a qualitative analysis of healthcare provider perspectives.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Costase Ndayishimiye, Richard Nduwayezu, Christoph Sowada, Katarzyna Dubas-Jakóbczyk
{"title":"Performance-based financing in Rwanda: a qualitative analysis of healthcare provider perspectives.","authors":"Costase Ndayishimiye, Richard Nduwayezu, Christoph Sowada, Katarzyna Dubas-Jakóbczyk","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-12605-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Results-based healthcare financing policies have been adopted in countries worldwide, including those with limited resources. We conducted a retrospective, semistructured interview study to evaluate healthcare providers' experiences with Rwanda's performance-based financing (PBF) policy and the factors influencing its implementation. Guided by the health policy evaluation model-context, content, process, and actors-as a deductive framework supplemented by inductive coding, we analysed data from 21 participants (doctors, n = 13; nurses, n = 5; midwives, n = 3). Providers described PBF as a key motivator, supplementing incomes, increasing accountability, and fostering teamwork to meet performance targets. PBF was credited with improving patient outcomes, particularly in incentivized services; however, concerns arose regarding disparities in service prioritization. Key facilitators of and barriers to the implementation of PBF were identified, providing insights into its operational dynamics. Strong political commitment and integration into national strategies, such as Imihigo, along with decentralization through district steering committees, were key contextual enablers, enhancing the program's flexibility and alignment with local priorities. The content factors centred on a two-tiered contracting system, combining national accreditation processes with individual performance incentives. Process factors supporting PBF were characterized by decentralized evaluations, audits, and multilevel communication, which collectively bolstered accountability mechanisms. The engagement and capacity of stakeholders were highlighted as crucial to the success of PBF. Nonetheless, significant barriers, such as payment delays, manual documentation, untimely evaluations, insufficient training, limited provider participation in decision-making, and the exclusion of patients as stakeholders, were identified. These findings offer practical recommendations for policymakers aiming to improve or adapt provider payment mechanisms in similar contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"418"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11929279/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12605-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Results-based healthcare financing policies have been adopted in countries worldwide, including those with limited resources. We conducted a retrospective, semistructured interview study to evaluate healthcare providers' experiences with Rwanda's performance-based financing (PBF) policy and the factors influencing its implementation. Guided by the health policy evaluation model-context, content, process, and actors-as a deductive framework supplemented by inductive coding, we analysed data from 21 participants (doctors, n = 13; nurses, n = 5; midwives, n = 3). Providers described PBF as a key motivator, supplementing incomes, increasing accountability, and fostering teamwork to meet performance targets. PBF was credited with improving patient outcomes, particularly in incentivized services; however, concerns arose regarding disparities in service prioritization. Key facilitators of and barriers to the implementation of PBF were identified, providing insights into its operational dynamics. Strong political commitment and integration into national strategies, such as Imihigo, along with decentralization through district steering committees, were key contextual enablers, enhancing the program's flexibility and alignment with local priorities. The content factors centred on a two-tiered contracting system, combining national accreditation processes with individual performance incentives. Process factors supporting PBF were characterized by decentralized evaluations, audits, and multilevel communication, which collectively bolstered accountability mechanisms. The engagement and capacity of stakeholders were highlighted as crucial to the success of PBF. Nonetheless, significant barriers, such as payment delays, manual documentation, untimely evaluations, insufficient training, limited provider participation in decision-making, and the exclusion of patients as stakeholders, were identified. These findings offer practical recommendations for policymakers aiming to improve or adapt provider payment mechanisms in similar contexts.

卢旺达基于绩效的融资:对医疗保健提供者观点的定性分析。
世界各国,包括资源有限的国家,都采取了注重成果的卫生保健筹资政策。我们进行了一项回顾性的半结构化访谈研究,以评估医疗保健提供者对卢旺达基于绩效的融资(PBF)政策的经验以及影响其实施的因素。在卫生政策评估模型(情境、内容、过程和行为者)的指导下,作为演绎框架,辅以归纳编码,我们分析了来自21名参与者(医生,n = 13;护士,n = 5;助产士,n = 3)。供应商将PBF描述为一个关键的激励因素,补充收入,增加责任,促进团队合作以实现绩效目标。PBF被认为改善了患者的预后,特别是在激励性服务方面;但是,人们对服务优先次序方面的差异表示关切。确定了实施PBF的主要促进因素和障碍,为其运营动态提供了见解。强有力的政治承诺和融入国家战略(如Imihigo),以及通过地区指导委员会进行的权力下放,是关键的环境促成因素,增强了项目的灵活性,并与当地优先事项保持一致。内容因素集中于两级合同制度,将国家认可程序与个人业绩奖励相结合。支持PBF的过程因素的特点是分散的评估、审计和多层次的沟通,它们共同加强了问责机制。与会者强调,利益攸关方的参与和能力对PBF的成功至关重要。尽管如此,仍发现了重大障碍,如付款延迟、手工文件、不及时的评估、培训不足、提供者参与决策有限以及将患者排除在利益相关者之外。这些发现为决策者在类似情况下改善或调整供应商支付机制提供了实用建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信