ABSTRACT
Ghana is positioned to become the first country in sub-Saharan Africa to implement universal health coverage based on nationwide expansion of geographic access through the Community-based Health Planning and Services initiative. This achievement is the outcome of 3 decades of implementation research that health authorities have used for guiding the development of its primary health care program. This implementation research process has comprised Ghana’s official endorsement of the 1978 Alma Ata Declaration, leading to the institutionalization of evidence relevant to the strategic design of primary health care and national health insurance policies and services. Rather than relying solely upon the dissemination of project results, Ghana has embraced a continuous and systemic process of knowledge capture, curation, and utilization of evidence in expanding geographic access by a massive expansion in the number of community health service points that has taken decades. A multisectoral approach has been pursued that has involved the creation of systematic partnerships that included all levels of the political system, local development officials, community groups and social networks, multiple university-based disciplines, external development partners, and donors. However, efforts to achieve high levels of financial access through the roll-out of the National Health Insurance Scheme have proceeded at a less consistent pace and been fraught with many challenges. As a result, financial access has been less comprehensive than geographical access despite sequential reforms having been made to both programs. The legacy of activities and current research on primary health care and national health insurance are reviewed together with unaddressed priorities that merit attention in the future. Factors that have facilitated or impeded progress with research utilization are reviewed and implications for health systems strengthening in Ghana and elsewhere in Africa and globally are discussed.
INTRODUCTION
The World Health Organization (WHO) emphasizes that achieving universal health coverage (UHC) requires that all individuals and communities receive the health services they need without suffering financial hardship. This global health objective is formalized by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 3.81:
Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all.
To achieve this goal, WHO’s Thirteenth General Program of Work prioritized expanding UHC to a billion more people worldwide by 2023.1 While UHC includes the full spectrum of essential, high-quality services, its foundation is the goal of achieving a strong and resilient people-centered health system with primary health care (PHC).1 This focus provided the rationale for Ghana’s Ministry of Health’s (MOH) recent review of its strategy toward achieving UHC that involved developing a national UHC roadmap for strengthening PHC delivery by improving service availability for the population through community health services and the expansion of public health interventions.2 In this case study, we review the evidence behind programs and mechanisms that have fostered the utilization of implementation and policy research in Ghana. By gathering and interpreting data at each level of the health care system, this study exemplifies comprehensive health systems implementation research. We describe the state of progress toward expanding geographic and financial access to PHC, with an emphasis on what has been achieved and what remains to be accomplished to reach Ghana’s UHC goals.
We describe the state of progress toward expanding geographic and financial access to PHC, with an emphasis on what has been achieved and what remains to be accomplished to reach Ghana’s UHC goals.
Trends in the coverage of UHC initiatives have progressed over the past 2 decades (Figure). After a period of trial and research in the 1990s, the Community-based Health Planning and Services (CHPS) initiative entered an implementation phase in 2000 that was very gradual until 2009, when implementation accelerated, with levels of coverage eventually approaching UHC goals within the decade that followed. The Figure indicates health insurance coverage, conducted in 2008,3 2014,4 2016,5 2017,6 and 2018,7 as reported in the national statistics and surveys. The observed trend was less consistent than CHPS coverage trends, despite initially impressive gains in uptake. Based on coverage estimates for women of reproductive age from repeated nationally representative surveys, the proportion of women with valid insurance coverage peaked at roughly 60% between 2014 and 2016 and declined thereafter, hovering around 50%, even though enrollment figures may have been higher.8 This article aims to explain these trends and the contrasting coverage of CHPS and the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) over the post-2000 period.
THE ROLE OF RESEARCH IN ATTAINING UHC
Ghana’s UHC policy has 2 interlocking components: (1) the CHPS initiative that focuses on achieving geographic access to essential services in people’s communities,9–11 and (2) the NHIS that aims to overcome financial barriers through a national social insurance program.12 Because of the systematic application of implementation research evidence to policies that were pursued, CHPS and NHIS are uniquely Ghanaian solutions to the challenges of reaching a culturally diverse, geographically dispersed, and economically disadvantaged population.13 Both have been the subject of extensive pilot testing, replication trial, knowledge management, evaluation, reflection, and policy development and reform—to ultimately achieve nationwide UHC.14
Ghana’s commitment to achieving UHC commenced with its endorsement of the 1978 Alma Ata Accord.14 However, except for launching district hospitals and subdistrict health centers, the country’s economic crises in the 1980s prevented an effective implementation of this accord. While the district hospitals and subdistrict health centers provided essential services, they were intended to receive referrals from more peripheral levels of care because most such facilities were remotely located away from rural households. The MOH responded to this problem by creating a cadre of community-based workers, called community health nurses (CHNs), and deploying these workers as PHC providers at convenient community locations.15 However, the core cost of constructing community health posts, providing essential equipment, and providing essential pharmaceuticals for CHNs was unsustainable in most rural districts. CHNs were hired and trained, but because resources for health posts and equipment were inadequate, they were deployed to hospitals and subdistrict clinics where their presence was redundant with other paramedical staff. Moreover, their clinic locations were remote from most households. By the early 1990s, it was apparent to policy makers that “health for all by the year 2000,” as envisioned at Alma Ata, was unlikely to come to fruition soon for most Ghanaians unless reform was pursued.16
The geographic accessibility problem was compounded by financial challenges. To sustain the provision of care, the MOH embraced a “cash-and-carry” policy in the 1980s that charged all patients for PHC services. Practical problems with this policy’s provisions prevented families from acquiring essential care. In response to widespread discontent with this policy, an untested “exemption policy” was launched in the 1990s that aimed to provide free services to children aged 5 years and younger. But because this policy lacked the financial support it required, PHC operations were severely disrupted by shortages of essential drugs and supplies. As the year 2000 approached, it was apparent to the policy community that developing geographically accessible services at scale required further evaluation17 and a sustainable health insurance program that required careful investigation.18,19 Research stations that had been created by the MOH were commissioned for concerted investigation of solutions to the access and insurance challenges. The Navrongo Health Research Center (NHRC) in northern Ghana was tasked with addressing the access challenge. The Dodowa Health Research Center (DHRC) in Greater Accra Region was assigned responsibility for developing and testing approaches to sustainable health insurance.
By 2000, it was apparent to the policy community that developing geographically accessible services at scale required further evaluation and a sustainable health insurance program that required careful investigation.
DEVELOPING GEOGRAPHIC ACCESS: THE CHPS INITIATIVE
To generate evidence for guiding discussions on the appropriate strategic design of a program to improve access to PHC services, the MOH requested the NHRC to pilot the deployment of nurses and volunteers to 3 communities based on the WHO “Strategic Approach”20,21 and informed by participatory planning research methods.22 A steering committee, chaired by the MOH Director of Medical Services, ensured that research would be embedded into policy planning operations,23–25 with protocols reflecting the need to address strategic questions about the appropriate operational design of community-based PHC services.
The formative pilot and experimental efforts that created CHPS led to a series of implementation studies. When these studies identified problems, research on reform was undertaken that guided the process of improving program functioning. There were 5 critical program components of PHC organization in CHPS that were the direct outcome of implementation research: (1) community engagement; (2) financing; (3) nurse training, deployment, and management; (4) essential equipment procurement and operation; (5) volunteer recruitment, deployment, and management (Table 1).
As of 2021, the national implementation of CHPS has reached 6,277 of the 6,809 targeted service catchment areas. This achievement spans over 2 decades of implementation effort.
Phase 1: Developing a Community-Based Strategy
Advocacy, based on international agency initiatives elsewhere, suggested contrasting approaches to community-based operations. UNICEF’s experience with volunteer-based services in the Republic of Benin was translated into the Bamako Initiative,26,27 which involved convening community health committees for managing revolving accounts to sustain the financing of essential drugs. Unpaid volunteers were recruited and trained to provide primary care and referral services. Several international commentators viewed the Bamako Initiative as an affordable means of achieving health for all.28 Ghana’s experience with volunteer initiatives in the 1980s raised questions about the quality of care that volunteers were capable of providing as well as reasons to doubt the sustainability of unpaid volunteer approaches.29,30 In response to the view that paid professional workers were essential to the provision of PHC, the MOH launched a program that involved training CHNs for 18 months. However, the absence of evidence on the feasibility and effectiveness of CHN deployment at the community level could not justify investment in their training.
A pilot intervention was developed to assess the feasibility of volunteer versus CHN placement in 3 communities in Kassena-Nankana district in the Upper-East Region (UER) of Ghana. Operational problems were taken to community committees for discussion. All 3 communities expressed an interest in having resident nurse access and a willingness to assemble volunteer teams for constructing interim facilities using traditional methods and materials with the understanding that their effort to create locations for services would be rewarded with the posting of a resident nurse (Box 1).
Community-Constructed Interim Facilities in Ghana
Volunteer deployment was also piloted, generating experience with the process of recruitment, training, and supervision for community health volunteers. The apparent feasibility of both strategies contributed to policy commitment to proceed with community-based program planning. The relative efficacy of the pilot was assessed as a phase 2 district experiment that focused on assessing health and demographic endpoints17 that have been extensively disseminated elsewhere.31,32
Practical experiential learning from the trial that profoundly affected national operational policy had garnered less attention in the formal literature on research outcomes. The phase 1 pilot was limited to 3 communities spanning only 18 months of qualitative participatory appraisal of community reactions to services for eliciting grassroots advice in strategic planning.22 Considerable experience was nonetheless gained that was relevant to addressing practical challenges associated with community engagement, worker deployment, and financing and sustaining operations (Table 1, column 1). To clarify operational strategies to be tested in a phase 2 experiment, practical learning was shared with the MOH oversight team (Table 1, column 2), which had a lasting impact on CHPS planning, implementation, and policy (Table 1, column 3).
Phase 2: Testing the Strategy
Despite important operational lessons that phase 1 provided, the efficacy of volunteer versus CHN deployment in the community could not be resolved by a 3-community pilot. A district-wide trial was required with study arms: nurse only, volunteer only, and combined nurse and volunteer deployment. These conditions could be tested relative to the effectiveness of care limited to subdistrict and hospital clinics.
This experiment, referred to as “the Navrongo Experiment,” was configured by assigning each of the 4 subdistricts of Kassena-Nankana district to one of the worker deployment conditions, whereby all communities were exposed to 1 or both of the conditions.17 Overall community-based care was found to be affordable (US$8.72 per capita per year) and the incremental cost of CHPS implementation—incorporating both resident nurses and volunteers—was only US$1.92 per capita. Work routines, supervisory arrangements, and other important administrative details provided an evidence base for the GHS to plan national scale-up.9 Most importantly, the basic staffing parameters of the national community-based program were clarified (Table 2).
Phase 3: Setting the Stage to Scale Up the Strategy
In 1998, the MOH convened a National Health Forum with all district, regional, and national directors of health services to build consensus for scaling up the Navrongo Experiment generated evidence that is summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Consensus could not be reached as debate ensued about the feasibility of transferring the Navrongo system to other districts owing to diverse environmental, cultural, and economic circumstances (Box 2).
The Staffing Outcome of the Navrongo Initiative: Paid Nurses and Volunteers for Optimizing Community Engagement
The Nkwanta District Health Director from the Volta Region of Ghana offered to test the transfer of the Navrongo approach. A 1-year reprieve on action in Navrongo was agreed upon, whereby Navrongo pilot activity was transferred to Nkwanta district to be replicated and adapted.
Results of the Nkwanta replication process are summarized in Table 3. National policies for staffing, capacity building, scale-up, operational dissemination, support systems development, and knowledge generation and management were outcomes of the Nkwanta initiative. Initially viewed as a 1-year demonstration, Nkwanta became a sustained resource, whereby teams from various districts across the country undertook peer learning exchanges, which resulted in scaling up CHPS operations nationwide for a decade.
The Nkwanta initiative resulted in national policies for staffing, capacity building, scale-up, operational dissemination, support systems development, and knowledge generation and management.
Phase 4: Scaling Up CHPS
Although policy pronouncements endorsed the scale-up of CHPS by the year 2000, initial progress was gradual for a decade (Figure 1). Rapid scale-up of CHPS ensued in 2009, however, with national coverage subsequently expanding until most districts were saturated with functioning zones within the following decade. By 2019, this saturation was a time of consolidation of gains, with policies directed to improving coverage by splitting zones and dispersing workers. Thus, by 2021, original coverage objectives had been met, with new goals defined by the need for CHPS refinement and following the creation of new administrative areas. We consider each of these eras, in turn.
Navrongo and Nkwanta field operations were used to expand national implementation capacity through field-based demonstration activities for visiting implementation teams. Rather than focusing on individual training, the orientation process was designed to develop team implementation capacity.
Participating districts were invited to assemble a complete CHPS implementation team comprised of district health management team representatives, a subdistrict supervisor, and at least 2 community health nurses called community health officers (CHOs) who had received additional in-service training and were scheduled to implement CHPS services. Participants observed the process of implementing the 6 Nkwanta implementation milestones (1) mapping, zone planning, and initial community leadership engagement; (2) community staff orientation and training; (3) local governance development; (4) community facility construction; (5) logistics mobilization and nurse deployment; and (6) volunteer mobilization, to equip implementation teams to establish at least 1 functioning zone where Nkwanta-like CHPS start-up and management procedures could be demonstrated. Equipped with this capability, participating teams could replicate the Nkwanta zone-by-zone process of rolling out CHPS as resources, capabilities, and community commitment emerged. This approach, termed “guided diffusion” was intended to foster the spread of CHPS among communities at the district level, even before national revenue was available to cover the district-level cost of starting the program.33
CHPS Reform: A Renewed 4-Phased Process of Implementation Research
The participatory orientation program had an immediate impact. By the end of 2008, 92% of all CHPS coverage was associated with implementation activities in 32 districts where implementation teams had experienced the team-based orientation visits. However, implementation in other districts was slowed by leaders’ lack of understanding of implementation milestones and the absence of resources for start-up costs. Reviews of capacity building,34 implementation leadership,35 and community engagement in districts that were not progressing with scale-up attested to the need for CHPS implementation reform. When elements of a possible reform package were clarified by a field review of CHPS implementation challenges,35 the GHS launched a trial of reform implementation in the Upper East Region (UER). Conducted in 2010–2015, this trial tested strategies for implementing elements of the 6 WHO health systems strengthening pillars.36
Known as the Ghana Essential Health Interventions Program (GEHIP), this initiative, located in 4 districts, commenced with a participatory community appraisal of the goals of national CHPS reform. Comprising a new phase 1 component of a research agenda, this investigation highlighted practical means of addressing problems that were hampering CHPS scale-up. Followed immediately with a 4-district trial of health systems strengthening activities, GEHIP tested means of involving communities in rapid implementation activities,37 improving the provision of emergency care,38 and reforming budgeting and financial mechanisms. These efforts expanded CHPS coverage from 20% to 100% in 4 years in treatment areas within the UER.
GEHIP applied lessons from the original phase 1 Navrongo pilot for the process of convening community-engaged construction of interim community care facilities. Rather than limiting action to 3 communities, however, GEHIP applied this strategy to 4 districts, leading to rapid expansion of CHPS coverage in treatment districts. GEHIP also addressed the problem of fragmentary emergency referral services with a community-engaged program of logistics support, emergency communication, and acute care development.37,38 Comparison district increases in coverage were also pronounced, but coverage impacts were half that of GEHIP.37,38 Mortality declined throughout the UER during the GEHIP period, but observed declines were significantly greater in treatment districts than in comparison districts.39
In response, several implementation lessons were adopted by the GHS. However, the continuing need for system learning led to further study and action. With support from the Korean International Cooperation Agency, GEHIP was expanded to cover all 13 UER districts to create a region of excellence for UHC achievement.40 A concomitant transfer experiment was launched to test the replicability of GEHIP in 2 districts each in the Northern and Volta regions. This ongoing process of operational learning is termed the Program for Strengthening the Implementation of the Community-based Health Planning and Services Initiative in Ghana or CHPS+.41 Taken as a set of learning activities, CHPS+ incorporates knowledge management operations as an integral component of its embedded system of project management, research, and utilization (Table 4).42 As Table 4, column 3 shows, CHPS+ has demonstrated that GEHIP methods for fostering community-driven construction of interim facilities could be replicated, thereby minimizing start-up costs and delays that arise from expensive and complex construction procurement procedures (Box 1).43
EXPANDING FINANCIAL ACCESS: THE NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE SCHEME
Out-of-pocket payments and the uncertainty around them have long been recognized as barriers to accessing needed health services in low- and middle-income countries, including Ghana. The application of user fees was commonly recognized as 1 factor exacerbating socioeconomic inequities in the uptake of health services.43 Before 2000, Ghana had addressed some of these through targeted user fee exemptions for specific groups including pregnant women, young children, health workers, patients with a limited range of conditions (e.g., TB, leprosy, mental illness), and the extreme poor. These exemptions were not consistently applied and therefore failed to resolve financial barriers or achieve equity.44,45 In some cases, research showed that health care providers and facility managers relied on user fees to maintain operations and did not want to apply the exemptions as required.46 There had also been limited experience with social health insurance programs for formal sector employees and others able to purchase coverage in the private sector.47 These efforts did not include the vast majority of Ghanaians who subsist on the informal economy and were not “pro” poor. To address these groups, small-scale public and private sector mutual health organizations arose in several settings. These efforts to establish a community-based health insurance scheme were limited in scope—reaching only 1% of the population,48 and their terms and coverage were not well coordinated and could not be used outside their limited geographic areas.49 Despite these developments, the highly unpopular system of user fees continued to dominate, and abolishing it became a political issue in the national elections of 2000.
The NHIS was established by an Act of Parliament and signed in September 2003 “to secure the provision of basic healthcare services.”50 The legislation also established the National Health Insurance Authority (NHIA) to implement a national health insurance policy, beginning in 2005. The move was widely celebrated as one of the very first efforts by a sub-Saharan African country to provide social health insurance for all.51 A main objective of the NHIS was to reduce financial barriers by providing enrollees with a standard package of health services intended to cover 95% of all health care needs. The NHIS benefits are portable and can be accessed at any accredited health facility nationwide. The NHIS is financed by a levy on value-added taxes, contributions to the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) from formally employed workers, individual premiums paid by informally employed members, and returns on investments made by the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) through Parliamentary allocation and donor contributions.
A main objective of the NHIS was to reduce financial barriers by providing enrollees with a standard package of health services intended to cover 95% of all health care needs.
To participate as beneficiaries, individuals and households must apply in person and pay an initial registration fee and annual premiums. Some groups are exempted from paying the annual premiums, including SSNIT contributors and pensioners, as well as some groups subject to user fee exemptions already: children younger than age 18 years (whose parents enroll), persons older than age 70 years, those with physical disabilities or mental illnesses, pregnant women and newborns (since 2008), and persons and households designated indigent by the Ministry of Social Welfare.53 However, despite these exemptions, some still face some form of financial hardships. For example, except for pregnant women and newborns who have immediate access to health care services after enrollment, the rest of those exempted have to serve a waiting period of 3 months as new registrants or 1 month for defaulting in paying their annual premiums.53 The annual premium charged can vary according to a person’s income or wealth, but a standard rate is most often applied.54
The proportion of the Ghanaian population enrolled in NHIS increased rapidly in its early years, growing from 25% to 42% between 2006 and 2007.55 However, the proportion who maintained coverage after initial enrollment, especially among those required to pay annual premiums has consistently lagged behind enrollment figures. Some individuals and families could not afford the annual premiums, while others prioritized other household expenses, planned to wait until they needed health care, or simply concluded that NHIS provided too little coverage to families to justify the expense of annual renewal.56 Evidence also suggests that a substantial portion of individuals were unaware of when their coverage expired, or the need to renew through annual premiums.57 In the face of declining NHIS coverage, research also indicated that the poorest individuals in remote areas were often the least likely to enroll or renew.58 Despite these challenges, there is evidence that the NHIS is reducing out-of-pocket payments for health services.58,59 Yet, the extent of this contribution to financial access has been less than expected.59 In 2008, a Maternal Exemption Policy was added to the NHIS. The idea is to eliminate premiums for women who were pregnant and to automatically cover neonates to remove any coverage gap between birth and registration.60
Accredited health facilities that provide covered services to individuals with valid NHIS credentials can submit claims for reimbursement to recover the cost of the services provided. However, there have been challenges with ensuring timely remittances in response to these claims. At times, the NHIF has not been replenished sufficiently quickly or completely to manage all of the claims. Delays of 6 to 12 months or more have become commonplace.61 At the start of the scheme, NHIA required providers to submit itemized billing without specification of standardized fees. This process was cumbersome and contributed to the inefficient processing of claims; it also resulted in wide-ranging claim amounts for the same services. By 2008, the NHIA had introduced the Ghana Diagnosis Related Groups (GDRG) schedule that standardized fees for specific conditions at all levels of service.62 This created some additional challenges, including incentives for providers to bill for the maximum allowable, whether a full range of services was actually provided to each client.63 An investigation in 2010 demonstrated that the GDRG had failed to contain costs, particularly for outpatient services, which accounted for the majority of claims.62
Over the past decade, the sustainability of the NHIS has raised concerns for the government mainly due to the rising volume of claims and the associated unrecovered cost. As the volume and cost of claims increased, replenishment of NHIF was slower than expected.64 In 2010, as a cost containment strategy, the NHIA began exploring a capitation payment system, through which providers would be afforded a single fee per individual, meant to cater to the whole range of covered services that the beneficiary would be expected to require over the course of the year.65 The system was piloted in the Ashanti Region in 2012; however, shortly after, political enthusiasm waned, and it was never expanded nationwide.66
A major reform of the NHIS is that it provides a single benefit package to everyone nationwide who registers regardless of employment, income, or age. The package is intended to cover the majority of diseases and conditions that afflict Ghanaians67 and includes outpatient services, including diagnostic testing and operations; all maternity care services, including cesarean deliveries; most inpatient care, including surgeries, specialist services, and hospital accommodations; oral health services; emergency care; and all drugs on the essential medicines list.54 Some major surgeries, cancer treatments, and cosmetic surgeries are excluded. Some of the challenges and barriers experienced have included: adding to the demands on health infrastructure and human resources, long delays in reimbursement for covered services which affected the financial sustainability of service provision at health facilities, the costs to the population of enrolling and renewing, required copayments, and the lack of coverage for some specific services, treatments, and procedures.
A major reform of the NHIS is that it provides a single benefit package to everyone nationwide who registers regardless of employment, income, or age.
A particular challenge for achieving UHC for preventive health components of PHC is that many basic preventive services are not specifically covered.61 Initial plans earmarked at least 10% of the NHIF for preventive services, but this has yet to be realized. Instead, in the early years, NHIF covered the country’s copayment for immunizations procured through Gavi, the Global Vaccine Alliance.68 As a result of this omission, CHPS compounds—which provide the majority of preventive services and a critical amount of basic curative care—have not benefited from the NHIS to the extent of subdistrict health centers and district hospitals. In fact, some district managers have deliberately staffed CHPS compounds to be able to provide a greater volume of reimbursable curative care, potentially neglecting the CHPS initiative’s fundamental preventive and community health focus.61 Moreover, reimbursement schemes fail to address the need for CHPS outreach and community mobilization costs. The focus on care reimbursement has had a dysfunctional tendency to divert CHPS from its community-oriented care origins by emphasizing instead its role as a community-based clinical program for curative care.
A 2016 presidential technical committee reviewed the challenges associated with NHIS implementation since its inception. While this review recommended that the scheme be restricted to a compulsory primary health care and maternal and child health care provision,69 thereby enabling the scheme to be more focused and serve as a vehicle for UHC, multiple operational problems persist.
DISCUSSION
It is the goal of UHC that all people obtain the health services they need without risking financial hardship arising from unaffordable out-of-pocket payments. This involves quality health services coverage ranging from health promotion to prevention, treatment, rehabilitation, and palliation as well as coverage with a form of financial risk protection. The role of the CHPS initiative toward achieving UHC in Ghana cannot be overemphasized. Whereas the NHIS has a wide range of service packages that it pays for, these are concentrated more on treatment to the detriment of the other service coverage areas of UHC especially health promotion and prevention including outreach services which are core functions of CHPS. Current evidence suggests that the existence of the NHIS has led to increased use of the CHPS services by the poorest who are insured.70,71 However, under the current dispensation of the NHIS, this increase is only skewed toward treatment or curative care, which could negatively impact Ghana’s roadmap to achieving UHC. Even though the determinants of enrollment into the NHIS have been extensively researched, empirical evidence to determine the effect of a strengthened health system, especially the CHPS initiative, on NHIS enrollment deserves further research. This should be complemented with a new round of implementation research that addresses complete UHC integration of the NHIS with CHPS. The complementary ability of a strengthened PHC system such as CHPS and a social pool health financing mechanism such as the NHIS with a focus on PHC could serve as the best pathway toward achieving UHC.
Thus, with the development of a national UHC roadmap, continuous efforts at ensuring that Ghanaians have timely access to quality health services irrespective of their ability to pay at the point of use should be a national priority. Key strategies in operationalizing the UHC roadmap must therefore include increasing NHIS enrollment and keeping members active and making CHPS functional throughout the country.
LESSONS LEARNED
UHC in Ghana is imminent. This achievement is the consequence of 4 decades of policy formation, public investment, and action that has been grounded in Ghana’s commitment to the 1978 Alma Ata Declaration and later emphasized by Astana 2018. Research has been critical to implementing strategies that work. When scaling up rapidly progressed without research grounding, several operational problems arose. Fortunately, the process has also led to 7 key learnings based on what has worked well.
Research has been critical to implementing strategies that work toward achieving UHC.
No single project or initiative has had UHC as the outcome. Rather, Ghana has instituted a process for sequential research to build on accumulated learning. Progress achieved will not end the continuous learning process; research for developing PHC will continue. The process of sequential implementation learning has been sustained by CHPS, with an apparent effect on the sustainability of CHPS itself.65,66 In contrast, the NHIS was launched based on pilot implementation. Research that ensued focused on diagnosing operational problems rather than testing implementation improvements. Results indicate a need to reverse research priorities: CHPS should have a new research agenda focused on problems and quality of care, and the NHIS should prioritize implementation research for achieving sustainable mass coverage as well as complete integration of NHIS and CHPS.
The CHPS learning process constitutes an example of embedded implementation science,23,72,73 while NHIS research has been planned, conducted, and disseminated by researchers. CHPS research directions and findings are owned by the government GHS leadership structure, while NHIS research is external to the system that it aims to improve. The CHPS integrated and comanaged approach maximizes prospects that research outcomes will serve as program implementation inputs.
Key policy-relevant evidence has been institutionalized through deliberate knowledge management—through active and ongoing engagement between policy makers, implementation authorities, and researchers—and not merely passively disseminated. Research has used mixed methods, always with a theoretical grounding that permits rigorous inference, and scaling up has been the subject of research, not just a decree at the end of each project phase or research episode. Carefully designed mixed method research has provided valuable insights into NHIS functioning, coverage, and impact.
External financing has been critical to the conduct of NHIS research but not controlling. Multiple donors have been involved in NHIS research, but none directed or financed operations on these initiatives. In general, the NHIS research has benefited from avoiding cooperating agency implementation activities. Several donors that have been engaged in CHPS implementation have often used their own systems of operations and procurement that have been dysfunctional to the GHS administrative procedures, processes, and ownership.
CHPS and NHIS research operated at all levels of the system, unified by a system-thinking perspective. In both the NHIS and CHPS development domains, political leadership engagement contributed to UHC's impact when the research system policy system engaged all levels of the political system. All aspects of the intervention are integrated: no particular modality, service strategy, or technical input has dominated the research operation; for the health insurance system, all levels of the health care operation have been the focus of research.
Learning takes time, especially in complex systems contexts. Projects can have artificial timelines; processes must be sustained beyond the duration of any particular project. Even as UHC approaches, the need for system learning continues. Both the NHIS and CHPS have complex implementation challenges to address in the future.
For both the NHIS and CHPS, failure and setbacks have been the focus of learning and corrective action rather than an outcome that terminates investigation. Diagnostic research has been a continuous component of the learning process. Problems that persist will now be the subject of forthcoming investigation and action. Achieving UHC involves integrating the CHPS initiative and NHIS operations into a combined fully functional system of care. While the concomitant presence of CHPS with NHIS represents progress to this end, operational details of this partnership merit further implementation research. Cost recovery arrangements support the provision of CHPS clinical services, but inadequately address links between NHIS reimbursement mechanisms and CHPS outreach, preventive services, and community engagement operations. Accessible services will fail to achieve UHC if achieving financial accessibility remains elusive. For this reason, a comprehensive system-learning approach should not be limited to addressing service readiness, geographic availability, and financial access in isolation.
For the NHIS and CHPS, failure and setbacks have been the focus of learning and corrective action rather than an outcome that terminates investigation.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Further systems trials and investigations are needed that aim to develop a fully functional UHC system in trial districts, using Ghana’s recently implemented CHPS+ project with its functioning PHC system as a platform for implementation research on developing and testing NHIS reform.
What would such an investigation entail? To progress toward UHC, a new phased implementation research initiative is needed that builds on the successes of the CHPS process of sequential investigation and that addresses the deficiencies of the NHIS program highlighted in insightful studies. This research program should use the informative strategy of NHIS research on diagnosing operational problems to investigate CHPS quality and operational problems associated with functionality. The following 4 overlapping phases could be pursued.
To progress toward UHC, a new phased implementation research initiative is needed that builds on the successes of past research and addresses deficiencies.
A strategic crossover approach would commence with a rapid qualitative systems appraisal of health care worker, supervisor, and district manager reactions to investigator-posited improvements in the total system of care, focusing primarily on possible NHIS reform.
Based on the lessons learned, stakeholders could launch a new plausibility trial in districts that have achieved advanced coverage with CHPS operations but where possible flaws in the regimen of CHPS services require investigation.
In response to phase 2 continuous observation of the district trial, knowledge management and systems research inference could be managed in conjunction with replication activities, designed to assess the scaling up potential of the NHIS reforms that are under investigation.
When phase 3 scale-up procedures have evidence to guide action, a national reform of NHIS and CHPS could proceed with evidence to guide the national reform process.
The role of research in guiding UHC remains crucial and would evolve as health system changes and programs mature over time. Achieving UHC will require incremental operational learning and a flexible research and program paradigm to ensure that findings from embedded IR can be incorporated into policy implementation processes as they arise, even when the coverage of the NHIS and CHPS is complete. Research strategies that have contributed to CHPS and NHIS development in the past merit review and utilization for addressing UHC development needs in the future.
Acknowledgments
We wish to acknowledge the support provided for this study by the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and express our thanks to the Ghana Health Service and Ministry of Health as well as the participants and other partners whose collaboration was key to the lessons reported in this article.
Author contributions
All coauthors contributed to conceptualizing this article. Original drafts were prepared by JKAW with contributions from SA, AAB, SPK, and JFP. All authors approved the final submission.
Competing interests
None declared.
Notes
Peer Reviewed
Cite this article as: Awoonor-Williams JK, Apanga S, Bawah AA, et al. Using health systems and policy research to achieve universal health coverage in Ghana. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2022;10(4)(Suppl 1): e2100763. https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00763
- Received: December 8, 2021.
- Accepted: May 31, 2022.
- Published: September 15, 2022.
- © Awoonor-Williams et al.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly cited. To view a copy of the license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. When linking to this article, please use the following permanent link: https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00763
REFERENCES
- 1.↵
- 2.↵
- 3.↵
- 4.↵
- 5.↵
- 6.↵
- 7.↵
- 8.↵
- 9.↵
- 10.
- 11.↵
- 12.↵
- 13.↵
- 14.↵
- 15.↵
- 16.↵
- 17.↵
- 18.↵
- 19.↵
- 20.↵
- 21.↵
- 22.↵
- 23.↵
- 24.
- 25.↵
- 26.↵
- 27.↵
- 28.↵
- 29.↵
- 30.↵
- 31.↵
- 32.↵
- 33.↵
- 34.↵
- 35.↵
- 36.↵
- 37.↵
- 38.↵
- 39.↵
- 40.↵
- 41.↵
- 42.↵
- 43.↵
- 44.↵
- 45.↵
- 46.↵
- 47.↵
- 48.↵
- 49.↵
- 50.↵
- 51.↵
- 52.
- 53.↵
- 54.↵
- 55.↵
- 56.↵
- 57.↵
- 58.↵
- 59.↵
- 60.↵
- 61.↵
- 62.↵
- 63.↵
- 64.↵
- 65.↵
- 66.↵
- 67.↵
- 68.↵
- 69.↵
- 70.↵
- 71.↵
- 72.↵
- 73.↵
- 74.
- 75.
- 76.
- 77.
- 78.
- 79.
- 80.
- 81.
- 82.
- 83.
- 84.
- 85.
- 86.
- 87.
- 88.