How do patient feedback systems work in low-income and middle-income countries? Insights from a realist evaluation in Bangladesh

Power and positionality in the practice of health system responsiveness at sub-national level: insights from the Kenyan coast

BACKGROUND

Health system responsiveness to public priorities and needs is a broad, multi-faceted and complex health system goal thought to be important in promoting inclusivity and reducing system inequity in participation. Power dynamics underlie the complexity of responsiveness but are rarely considered. This paper presents an analysis of various manifestations of power within the responsiveness practices of Health Facility Committees (HFCs) and Sub-county Health Management Teams (SCHMTs) operating at the subnational level in Kenya. Kenyan policy documents identify responsiveness as an important policy goal.

METHODS

Our analysis draws on qualitative data (35 interviews with health managers and local politicians, four focus group discussions with HFC members, observations of SCHMT meetings, and document review) from a study conducted at the Kenyan Coast. We applied a combination of two power frameworks to interpret our findings: Gaventa's power cube and Long's actor interface analysis.

RESULTS

We observed a weakly responsive health system in which system-wide and equity in responsiveness were frequently undermined by varied forms and practices of power. The public were commonly dominated in their interactions with other health system actors: invisible and hidden power interacted to limit their sharing of feedback; while the visible power of organisational hierarchy constrained HFCs' and SCHMTs' capacity both to support public feedback mechanisms and to respond to concerns raised. These power practices were underpinned by positional power relationships, personal characteristics, and world views. Nonetheless, HFCs, SCHMTs and the public creatively exercised some power to influence responsiveness, for example through collaborations with political actors. However, most resulting responses were unsustainable, and sometimes undermined equity as politicians sought unfair advantage for their constituents.

CONCLUSION

Our findings illuminate the structures and mechanisms that contribute to weak health system responsiveness even in contexts where it is prioritised in policy documents. Supporting inclusion and participation of the public in feedback mechanisms can strengthen receipt of public feedback; however, measures to enhance public agency to participate are also needed. In addition, an organisational environment and culture that empowers health managers to respond to public inputs is required.

'We stay silent and keep it in our hearts': a qualitative study of failure of complaints mechanisms in Malawi's health system

A responsive health system must have mechanisms in place that ensure it is accountable to those it serves. Patients in Malawi have to overcome many barriers to obtain care. Many of these barriers reflect weak accountability. There are at least 30 mechanisms through which Malawian patients in the public sector can assert their rights, yet few function well and, as a consequence, they are underused. Our aim was to identify the various channels for complaints and why patients are reluctant to use them when they experience poor quality or inappropriate care, as well as the institutional, social and political factors that give rise to these problems. The study was set in the Blantyre district. We used qualitative methods, including ethnographic observations, focus group discussions, document analysis and interviews with stakeholders involved in complaint handling both in Blantyre and in the capital, Lilongwe. We found that complaints mechanisms and redress procedures are underutilized because of lack of trust, geographical inaccessibility and lack of visibility leading to limited awareness of their existence. Drawing on these results, we propose a series of recommendations for the way forward.

Crying baby gets the milk? The governmentality of grievance redressal for patient rights violations in Karnataka, India

Background

Patient rights aim to protect the dignity of healthcare-seeking individuals. Realisation of these rights is predicated on effective grievance redressal for the victims of patient rights violations.

Methods

We used a critical case (that yields the most information) of patient rights violations reported in Karnataka state (South India) to explore the power dynamics involved in resolving grievances raised by healthcare-seeking individuals. Using interviews, media reports and other documents pertaining to the case, we explored the ‘governmentality’ of grievance redressal for patient rights violations, that is, the interaction of micropractices and techniques of power employed by actors to govern the processes and outcomes. We also examined whether existing governmentality ensured procedural and substantive justice to care-seeking individuals.

Results

Collective action was necessary by the aggrieved women in terms of protests, media engagement, petitions and follow-up to ensure that the State accepted a complaint against a medical professional. Each institution, and especially the medical professional council, exercised its power by problematising the grievance in its own way which was distinct from the problematisation of the grievance by the collective. The State bureaucracy enacted its power by creating a maze of organisational units and by fragmenting the grievance redressal across various bureaucratic units.

Conclusion

There is a need for measures guaranteeing accountability, transparency, promptness, fairness, credibility and trustworthiness in the patient grievance redressal system. Governmentality as a framework enabled to study how subjects (care-seeking individuals) are rendered governable and resist dominant forces in the grievance redressal system for patient rights violations.