Training and government regulation of private for-profit healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries may improve quality of care
Citation: Wiysonge CS, Abdullahi LH, Ndze VN, et al. Public stewardship of private for‐profit healthcare providers in low‐ and middle‐income countries. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016; (8): CD009855
What is this? The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an increased strain on health systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Existing research into the effects of public stewardship of private for‐profit healthcare providers may provide information for policy makers considering this option.
In this Cochrane systematic review, the authors searched for comparative effectiveness research that evaluated public sector regulation, training or co-ordination of the private for-profit health sector in LMICs. They did not restrict their search by date or language of publication and did their most recent searches in 2015 and 2016. They included 6 randomized trials, all of which targeted private for-profit pharmacy workers in Africa and Asia. These included studies of training alone (2 studies); regulation alone (1) and a multifaceted intervention involving training and regulation (3). They also identified 5 further studies that are awaiting assessment.
What works: Training of private for-profit healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries probably improves quality of care.
Government regulation of private for-profit healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries may improve quality of care.
A combination of training and government regulation for private for-profit healthcare providers in low- and middle-income countries may improve quality of care.
What doesn’t work: Nothing noted.
What’s uncertain: The effects of government co-ordination on quality of healthcare services are uncertain.
Disclaimer: This summary has been written by staff and volunteers of Evidence Aid in order to make the content of the original document accessible to decision makers who are searching for the available evidence on the coronavirus (COVID-19) but may not have the time, initially, to read the original report in full. This summary is not intended as a substitute for the medical advice of physicians, other health workers, professional associations, guideline developers, or national governments and international agencies. If readers of this summary think that the evidence that is presented within it is relevant to their decision-making they should refer to the content and details of the original article, and the advice and guidelines offered by other sources of expertise, before making decisions. Evidence Aid cannot be held responsible for any decisions made about the coronavirus (COVID-19) on the basis of this summary alone.
If you have found this summary helpful, please consider making a donation. If everyone who looked at our COVID-19 resources gave us just £2 per month, it would fund Evidence Aid’s life-saving work.