Authors ' conclusions Training probably improves quality of care ( i.e. adherence to recommended practice ) , regulation may improve quality of care , and we are uncertain about the effects of co‐ordination on quality of private for‐profit healthcare services in LMICs .
Background Governments use different approaches to ensure that private for‐profit healthcare services meet certain quality st and ards .
Such government guidance , referred to as public stewardship , encompasses government policies , regulatory mechanisms , and implementation strategies for ensuring accountability in the delivery of services .
However , the effectiveness of these strategies in low‐ and middle‐income countries ( LMICs ) have not been the subject of a systematic review .
Objectives To assess the effects of public sector regulation , training , or co‐ordination of the private for‐profit health sector in low‐ and middle‐income countries .
Effectiveness of a multi-component intervention on dispensing practices at private pharmacies in Vietnam and Thailand--a randomized controlled trial.
Private pharmacies are the first line of health care in many communities , commonly selling antibiotics in small doses and prescription-only drugs such as steroids without medical supervision . The aim was to study the effectiveness of a multi-faceted intervention on the dispensing practice s of drug sellers in Hanoi and Bangkok . The study was a r and omized , controlled trial with 68 Hanoi and 78 Bangkok pharmacies , r and omly selected and assigned for intervention and control . Behaviour was assessed by five simulated client visits per pharmacy per dispensing practice , at baseline and a month or more after each intervention . Three three-month interventions were implemented sequentially with four months in between : enforcement of regulations with local inspectors visiting to emphasize the importance of prescription-only medicine legislation ; education , performed face-to-face in Hanoi and by a large group in Bangkok ; and peer review , voluntary in Bangkok and compulsory in Hanoi . The intervention result ed in significant improvements in Hanoi , reducing the dispensing of illegal steroids ( 29 % vs. 62 % ) and low dose antibiotics ( 69 % vs. 90 % ) , sustained by means of the peer review ( 17 % vs. 57 % steroids and 71 % vs. 95 % antibiotics ) , and in fewer dispensers asking no questions and giving no advice ( 11 % vs. 30 % steroids and 51 % vs. 81 % antibiotics ) . The only significant improvement in Bangkok was the reduction in illegally dispensing steroids ( 25 % vs. 44 % ) after the regulatory intervention . In Bangkok , fewer of those in the group who volunteered for the peer review asked no questions and gave no advice for low-dose antibiotics requests after the peer review ( 58 % vs. 81 % ) . A multi-component intervention can have a profound effect in changing dispensers ' behaviour , but the effect is dependant on the context and the method of implementation . Possible reasons for differences are discussed
Authors ' conclusions Training probably improves quality of care ( i.e. adherence to recommended practice ) , regulation may improve quality of care , and we are uncertain about the effects of co‐ordination on quality of private for‐profit healthcare services in LMICs .
Background Governments use different approaches to ensure that private for‐profit healthcare services meet certain quality st and ards .
Such government guidance , referred to as public stewardship , encompasses government policies , regulatory mechanisms , and implementation strategies for ensuring accountability in the delivery of services .
However , the effectiveness of these strategies in low‐ and middle‐income countries ( LMICs ) have not been the subject of a systematic review .
Objectives To assess the effects of public sector regulation , training , or co‐ordination of the private for‐profit health sector in low‐ and middle‐income countries .