Objective The state of Gujarat in India (population 60 million) has implemented a public–private partnership (PPP) with private obstetricians called the Chiranjeevi Yojana (CY) since 2006. This study investigated the adequacy of basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care (BEmOC and CEmOC) services through the public and private sectors with reference to the United Nations (UN) guidelines. Design A cross-sectional facility survey was conducted in three districts. Results A total of 300 facilities, 151 public and 149 private, had provided obstetric services to a total of 53 896 births in the past 6 months. Nearly half, 135 facilities (104 public and 31 private), individually reported <10 births per month (low load), and, as a group, reported only 4% of all births in the past 6 months. The remaining 165 high-load facilities consisted of 23 (3 public; 20 private) full CEmOC, 66 (1; 65) ‘potential’ CEmOC, 12 (3; 9) BEmOC and 57 (40; 17) non-EmOC facilities. All the three districts exceeded the UN recommendation for EmOC availability by 3.3 to 11.3 times. Free provision, through both public and PPP facilities, ranged from 1.42 to 3.43. The actual performance was nearly double the recommendation for CEmOC but inadequate for BEmOC. Conclusions Public sector EmOC availability and provision is negligible. Private sector availability is well beyond the recommended UN norms. The CY programme has resulted in increased availability and provision of EmOC services. However, the overall provision of EmOC is compromised due to the poor performance of BEmOC functions and clustering of private facilities in towns.

The Chiranjeevi Yojana (CY) is a Public-Private-Partnership between the state and private obstetricians in Gujarat, India, since 2007. The state pays for institutional births of the most vulnerable households (below-poverty-line and tribal) in private hospitals. An innovative remuneration package has been designed to disincentivise unnecessary cesareans. This study examines characteristics of private facilities which participated in the program. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of all facilities which had conducted any births between June 2012 and April 2013 in three districts. We identified 111 private and 47 public facilities. Ninety of the 111 private facilities did caesarean sections in the last three months and were eligible to participate in the CY program. Of these, 40 (44%) participated in the CY program. We conducted descriptive and bivariate analyses followed by a Poisson regression model to estimate prevalence ratios of facility characteristics that predicted participation. We found that facilities participating in the CY program had a significantly higher likelihood of being general facilities (PR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3–2.9), or conducting lower proportion of cesarean births (PR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2–3.5) or having obstetricians new in private practice (PR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2–3.1) or being less expensive (PR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1–3.0). But none of these factors retained significance in a multi variable model. Private obstetricians who participate in the CY program tend to be new to private practice, provide general services, conduct fewer caesareans and are also less expensive. This is advantageous to the PPP and widens the target beneficiary groups that can be serviced by the PPP. The state should design remuneration packages with the aim of attracting relatively new obstetricians to set up practices in more remote areas. It is possible that the CY remuneration package design is effective in keeping caesarean rates in check, and needs to be studied further.

Infectious disease burden in Gujarat (2005-2011): comparison of selected infectious disease rates with India

The Chiranjeevi Yojana (CY) is a large public-private partnership program in Gujarat, India, under which the state pays private sector obstetricians to provide childbirth services to poor and tribal women. The CY was initiated statewide in 2007 because of the limited ability of the public health sector to provide emergency obstetric care and high out-of-pocket expenditures in the private sector (where most qualified obstetricians work), creating financial access barriers for poor women. Despite a million beneficiaries, there have been few reports studying CY, particularly the proportion of vulnerable women being covered, the expenditures they incur in connection with childbirth, and the level of subsidy provided to beneficiaries by the program. Cross-sectional facility based the survey of participants in three districts of Gujarat in 2012–2013. Women were interviewed to elicit sociodemographic characteristics, out-of-pocket expenditures, and CY program details. Descriptive statistics, chi square, and a multivariable logistic regression were performed. Of the 901 women surveyed in 129 facilities, 150 (16 %) were CY beneficiaries; 336 and 415 delivered in government and private facilities, respectively. Only 36 (24 %) of the 150 CY beneficiaries received a completely cashless delivery. Median out-of-pocket for vaginal/cesarean delivery among CY beneficiaries was $7/$71. The median degree of subsidy for women in CY who delivered vaginally/cesarean was 85/71 % compared to out-of-pocket expenditure of $44/$208 for vaginal/cesarean delivery paid by non-program beneficiaries in the private health sector. CY beneficiaries experienced a substantially subsidized childbirth compared to women who delivered in non-accredited private facilities. However, despite the government’s efforts at increasing access to delivery services for poor women in the private sector, uptake was low and very few women experienced a cashless delivery. While the long-term focus remains on strengthening the public sector’s ability to provide emergency obstetric care, the CY program is a potential means by which the state can ensure its poor mothers have access to necessary care if uptake is increased.