PubMed · 14486103
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
D PFANNER. 1962-06-23. The Grafenberg ring.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14486103/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The paper examines the validity of two indices of sustainability: family planning programme sustainability (PSI) and outcome sustainability (OSI) developed by Tsui and Knight (1997) by applying their original method to recent data. The indices succeed in identifying the directional path of programme and outcome sustainability. Close correlations are found between PSI and OSI predicted values and actual programme and outcome values. The indices provide a repeatable method for measuring sustainability, although they are sensitive to data measurement errors. The indices provide a policy tool for funding decisions but should be used with other data sources to judge sustainability.
Advocates of health system reform are calling for, among other things, decentralized, autonomous managerial and financial control, use of contracting and incentives, and a greater reliance on market mechanisms in the delivery of health services. The family planning and sexual health (FP&SH) sector already has experience of these. In this paper, we set forth three typical means of service provision within the FP&SH sector since the mid-1900s: independent not-for-profit providers, vertical government programmes and social marketing programmes. In each case, we present the context within which the service delivery mechanism evolved, the management techniques that characterize it and the lessons learned in FP&SH that are applicable to the wider debate about improving health sector management. We conclude that the FP&SH sector can provide both positive and negative lessons in the areas of autonomous management, use of incentives to providers and acceptors, balancing of centralization against decentralization, and employing private sector marketing and distribution techniques for delivering health services. This experience has not been adequately acknowledged in the debates about how to improve the quality and quantity of health services for the poor in developing countries. Health sector reform advocates and FP&SH advocates should collaborate within countries and regions to apply these management lessons.