Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Technical efficiency of women’s health prevention programs in Bucaramanga, Colombia: a four-stage analysis

Authors: Myriam Ruiz-Rodriguez, Laura A. Rodriguez-Villamizar, Ileana Heredia-Pi

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Primary Health Care (PHC) is an efficient strategy to improve health outcomes in populations. Nevertheless, studies of technical efficiency in health care have focused on hospitals, with very little on primary health care centers. The objective of the present study was to use the Data Envelopment Analysis to estimate the technical efficiency of three women’s health promotion and disease prevention programs offered by primary care centers in Bucaramanga, Colombia.

Methods

Efficiency was measured using a four-stage data envelopment analysis with a series of Tobit regressions to account for the effect of quality outcomes and context variables. Input/output information was collected from the institutions’ records, chart reviews and personal interviews. Information about contextual variables was obtained from databases from the primary health program in the municipality. A jackknife analysis was used to assess the robustness of the results.

Results

The analysis was based on data from 21 public primary health care centers. The average efficiency scores, after adjusting for quality and context, were 92.4 %, 97.5 % and 86.2 % for the antenatal care (ANC), early detection of cervical cancer (EDCC) and family planning (FP) programs, respectively. On each program, 12 of the 21 (57.1 %) health centers were found to be technically efficient; having had the best-practice frontiers. Adjusting for context variables changed the scores and reference rankings of the three programs offered by the health centers.

Conclusion

The performance of the women’s health prevention programs offered by the centers was found to be heterogeneous. Adjusting for context and health care quality variables had a significant effect on the technical efficiency scores and ranking. The results can serve as a guide to strengthen management and organizational and planning processes related to local primary care services operating within a market-based model such as the one in Colombia.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Giraldo Osorio A, Velez Alvarez C. [Primary health care: challenges for implementation in Latin America]. Aten Primaria. 2013;45(7):384–92.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Ramirez NA, Ruiz JP, Romero RV, Labonte R. Comprehensive primary health care in South America: contexts, achievements and policy implications. Cad Saude Publica. 2011;27(10):1875–90.CrossRefPubMed
3.
De Groote T, De Paepe P, Unger JP. Colombia: in vivo test of health sector privatization in the developing world. Int J Health Serv. 2005;35(1):125–41.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Bustamante AV, Mendez CA. Health care privatization in Latin America: comparing divergent privatization approaches in Chile, Colombia, and Mexico. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2014;39(4):841–86.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Abadia CE, Oviedo DG. Bureaucratic Itineraries in Colombia. A theoretical and methodological tool to assess managed-care health care systems. Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(6):1153–60.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Vargas I, Vazquez ML, Mogollon-Perez AS, Unger JP. Barriers of access to care in a managed competition model: lessons from Colombia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:297.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Ettenger A, Barnighausen T, Castro A. Health insurance for the poor decreases access to HIV testing in antenatal care: evidence of an unintended effect of health insurance reform in Colombia. Health Policy Plan. 2014;29(3):352–8.CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
Organization WH. The world health report 2008 - primary health hare (now more than ever). In: Organization WH, editor. World Health Report. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.
10.
Kringos DS, Boerma WG, Hutchinson A, van der Zee J, Groenewegen PP. The breadth of primary care: a systematic literature review of its core dimensions. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Pelone F KD, Romaniello A, Archiburi M, Salsiri C, Ricciardi W. Primary Care Efficiency Measurement Using Data Envelopment Analysis: A Systematic Review. J Med Syst. 2015;39(156):1–4. doi: 10.​1007/​s10916-014-0156-4.
12.
Hollingsworth B. The measurement of efficiency and productivity of health care delivery. Health Econ. 2008;17(10):1107–28.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Hollingsworth B, Dawson PJ, Maniadakis N. Efficiency measurement of health care: a review of non-parametric methods and applications. Health Care Manag Sci. 1999;2(3):161–72.CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Farrell MJ. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency. J R Stat Soc Ser A. 1957;70(3):253–90.CrossRef
16.
Gannon B. Testing for variation in technical efficiency of hospitals in Ireland. The Economic and Social Review. 2005;36(3):273–94.
17.
Puig-Junoy J. Eficiencia en la atención primaria de salud: una revisión crítica de las medidas de frontera. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2000;74:483–95.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Charnes ACW, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res. 1978;2:429–44.CrossRef
19.
Cordero-Ferrera JMPF, Santın D. Enhancing the inclusion of non-discretionary inputs in DEA. J Oper Res Soc. 2010;61:574–84.CrossRef
20.
Garcia-Fariñas AS-DZ, Chaviano-Moreno M, Muñiz-Cepero. Niveles de eficiencia de las policlínicas de Matanzas, Cuba, según el método de análisis envolvente de datos. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2007;22(2):100–9.CrossRef
21.
Hernández ARSSM. Assesing the technical efficiency of health posts in rural Guatemala: a data emvelopment analysis. Glob Health Action. 2014;7:23190.PubMed
22.
Ligarda JÑM. La eficiencia de las organizaciones de salud a través del análisis envolvente de datos. Microrredes de la Dirección de Salud IV Lima Este. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos 2006. 2003;67(2):142–51.
23.
Ramirez-Valdivia MT, Maturana S, Salvo-Garrido S. A multiple stage approach for performance improvement of primary healthcare practice. J Med Syst. 2011;35(5):1015–28.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Salinas-Martinez AMA-AM, Arteaga-García JC, Núñez-Rocha GM, Garza-Elizondo ME. Eficiencia Técnica de la atención al paciente con diabetes en el Primer Nivel. Revista Salud Pública de México. 2009;58(1):48–58.CrossRef
25.
Varela PS, Martins Gde A, Favero LP. Production efficiency and financing of public health: an analysis of small municipalities in the state of Sao Paulo--Brazil. Health Care Manag Sci. 2010;13(2):112–23.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Amico PR, Chilingerian JA, van Hasselt M. Community health center efficiency: the role of grant revenues in health center efficiency. Health Serv Res. 2014;49(2):666–82.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Milliken ODR, Barham V, Hogg W, Dahroug S, Russell G. Comparative Efficiency Assessment of Primary Care Service Delivery Models Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques. 2011;37(1):85–109.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Coelli TJ, Prasada Rao DS, O’Donnell CJ, Battese G. An introduction to efficiency and productivity anlysis. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2005.
29.
Murillo-Zamorano LRPC. Technical efficiency in primary health care: does quality matter? Eur J Health Econ. 2011;12:115–25.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Cordero-Ferrera JM, Crespo Cebada E, Murillo Zamorano LR. The effect of quality and socio-demographic variables on efficiency measures in primary health care. Eur J Health Econ. 2014;15(3):289–302.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Fried HSS, Yaisawarng S. Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency. J Prod Anal. 1999;12:249–67.CrossRef
32.
Boerleider AW, Wiegers TA, Mannien J, Francke AL, Deville W. Factors affecting the use of prenatal care by non-western women in industrialized western countries: a systematic review. Eur J Public Health. 2013;22(6):904–13.
33.
Say L, Raine R. A systematic review of inequalities in the use of maternal health care in developing countries: examining the scale of the problem and the importance of context. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85(10):812–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Simkhada B, Teijlingen ER, Porter M, Simkhada P. Factors affecting the utilization of antenatal care in developing countries: systematic review of the literature. J Adv Nurs. 2008;61(3):244–60.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Feijen-de Jong E, Jansen D, Baarveld F, van der Schans CP, Schellevis FG, Reijneveld SA. Determinants of late and/or inadequate use of prenatal healthcare in high-income countries: a systematic review. Eur J Public Health. 2011;22(6):904–13.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Finlayson K, Downe S. Why Do Women Not Use Antenatal Services in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Studies. PLoS Med. 2013;10(1):e1001373.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Downe S, Finlayson K, Walsh D, Lavender T. ‘Weighing up and balancing out’: a meta-synthesis of barriers to antenatal care for marginalised women in high-income countries. BJOG. 2009;116(4):518–29.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Chidyaonga-Maseko F, Chirwa ML, Muula AS. Underutilization of cervical cancer prevention services in low and middle income countries: a review of contributing factors. Pan Afr Med J. 2015;21:231.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Corcoran J, Crowley M. Latinas’ attitudes about cervical cancer prevention: a meta-synthesis. J Cult Divers. 2014;21(1):15–21.PubMed
40.
Williams-Brennan L, Gastaldo D, Cole DC, Paszat L. Social determinants of health associated with cervical cancer screening among women living in developing countries: a scoping review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012;286(6):1487–505.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Ncube B, Bey A, Knight J, Bessler P, Jolly PE. Factors associated with the uptake of cervical cancer screening among women in portland. Jamaica N Am J Med Sci. 2015;7(3):104–13.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Osingada CP, Ninsiima G, Chalo RN, Muliira JK, Ngabirano T. Determinants of Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening Services at a No-cost Reproductive Health Clinic Managed by Nurse-Midwives. Cancer Nurs. 2015;38(3):177–84.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Hounton S, Barros AJ, Amouzou A, Shiferaw S, Maiga A, Akinyemi A, Friedman H, Koroma D. Patterns and trends of contraceptive use among sexually active adolescents in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, and Nigeria: evidence from cross-sectional studies. Glob Health Action. 2015;8:29737.PubMed
44.
Roberts A, Noyes J. Contraception and women over 40 years of age: mixed-method systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2009;65(6):1155–70.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Haider TL, Sharma M. Barriers to family planning and contraception uptake in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Int Q Community Health Educ. 2012;33(4):403–13.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Andi JR, Wamala R, Ocaya B, Kabagenyi A. Modern contraceptive use among women in Uganda: An analysis of trend and patterns (1995–2011). Etude Popul Afr. 2014;28(2):1009–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
47.
Ayanore MA, Pavlova M, Groot W. Unmet reproductive health needs among women in some West African countries: a systematic review of outcome measures and determinants. Reprod Health. 2016;13(1):5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Agudelo M. Barreras para la planificación familiar en contextos marginales del Distrito Federal de Ciudad de México: visión de los proveedores de servicios de salud. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 2009;27(2):169–76.
49.
Allen-Leigh B, Villalobos-Hernandez A, Hernandez-Serrato MI, Suarez L, de la Vara E, de Castro F, Schiavon-Ermani R. [Use of contraception and family planning in adolescent and adult women in Mexico]. Salud Publica Mex. 2013;55 Suppl 2:S235–40.PubMed
50.
McDonald JF, Moffitt RA. The uses of Tobit analysis. Rev Econ Stat. 1980;62(2):318–21.CrossRef
51.
San Sebastian MLH. Efficiency of the health extension programme in Tigray. Ethiopia: a data envelopment analysis BMC International Health and Human Rights. 2010;10:16.
52.
Muñiz M. Separating managerial inefficiency and external conditions in data. Eur J Oper Res. 2002;149(3):625–43.CrossRef
53.
Deidda ML-VF, Codagnone C, Maghiros J. Using Data Envelopment Analysis to Analyse the Efficiency of Primary Care Units. Med Syst. 2014;38:122.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Technical efficiency of women’s health prevention programs in Bucaramanga, Colombia: a four-stage analysis
Authors
Myriam Ruiz-Rodriguez
Laura A. Rodriguez-Villamizar
Ileana Heredia-Pi
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1837-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

Patient safety culture and associated factors: A quantitative and qualitative study of healthcare workers’ view in Jimma zone Hospitals, Southwest Ethiopia

Research article

Survey of medical genetic services in Italy: year 2011

Research article

A qualitative study of professional and carer perceptions of the threats to safe hospital discharge for stroke and hip fracture patients in the English National Health Service

Study protocol

The evaluation of a healthcare passport to improve quality of care and communication for people living with dementia (EQuIP): a protocol paper for a qualitative, longitudinal study

Research article

Utilization of youth friendly services and associated factors among youth in Harar town, east Ethiopia: a mixed method study

Research article

How hepatitis C patients manage the treatment process of pegylated interferon and ribavirin therapy: a qualitative study