↓ Skip to main content

Social accountability in primary health care in West and Central Africa: exploring the role of health facility committees

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Social accountability in primary health care in West and Central Africa: exploring the role of health facility committees
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2344-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elsbet Lodenstein, Eric Mafuta, Adolphe C. Kpatchavi, Jean Servais, Marjolein Dieleman, Jacqueline E. W. Broerse, Alpha Amadou Bano Barry, Thérèse M. N. Mambu, Jurrien Toonen

Abstract

Social accountability has been emphasised as an important strategy to increase the quality, equity, and responsiveness of health services. In many countries, health facility committees (HFCs) provide the accountability interface between health providers and citizens or users of health services. This article explores the social accountability practices facilitated by HFCs in Benin, Guinea and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The paper is based on a cross-case comparison of 11 HFCs across the three countries. The HFCs were purposefully selected based on the (past) presence of community participation support programs. The cases were derived from qualitative research involving document analysis as well as interviews and focus group discussions with health workers, citizens, committee members, and local authorities. Most HFCs facilitate social accountability by engaging with health providers in person or through meetings to discuss service failures, leading to changes in the quality of services, such as improved health worker presence, the availability of night shifts, the display of drug prices and replacement of poorly functioning health workers. Social accountability practices are however often individualised and not systematic, and their success depends on HFC leadership and synergy with other community structures. The absence of remuneration for HFC members does not seem to affect HFC engagement in social accountability. Most HFCs in this study offer a social accountability forum, but the informal and non-systematic character and limited community consultation leave opportunities for the exclusion of voices of marginalised groups. More inclusive, coherent and authoritative social accountability practices can be developed by making explicit the mandate of HFC in the planning, monitoring, and supervision of health services; providing instruments for organising local accountability processes; strengthening opportunities for community input and feedback; and strengthening links to formal administrative accountability mechanisms in the health system.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 158 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 28 18%
Unknown 49 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 29 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 52 33%