Mobile Clinics & Bundled Healthcare: An Exploration of Patient Perceptions of the SughaVazhvu Approach to Chronic Care Management

As the burden of non-communicable diseases increases worldwide, it is imperative that health systems adopt delivery approaches that will enable them to provide accessible, high-quality, and low-cost care to patients that need consistent management of their lifelong conditions. This is especially true in low- and middle-income country settings, such as India, where the disease burden is high and the health sector resources to address it are limited. The subscription-based, managed care model that SughaVazhvu Healthcare—a non-profit social enterprise operating in rural Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu—has deployed demonstrates potential for ensuring continuity of care among chronic care patients in resource-strained areas. However, its effectiveness and sustainability will depend on its ability to positively impact patient health status and patient satisfaction with the care management they are receiving. Therefore, this study is not only a program appraisal to aid operational quality improvement of the SughaVazhvu Healthcare model, but also an attempt to identify the factors that affect patient satisfaction among individuals with chronic conditions actively availing services.

Understanding Patients’ Needs and Healthcare Seeking Behavior in Rural Southern India: The Comparison of Providers through Patients’ Perceptions and Cost Issues

This study explores patients’ needs in rural Thanjavur, southern India through understanding how people with diabetes choose providers and perceive care-seeking experience. To measure perception, the study surveyed people regarding six common barriers to care-seeking behavior, selected from both literature and local expert interview. Ninety-one percent of the sampled population goes to public or private allopathic providers out of the six presented providers. The low socioeconomic group and people with more complications or comorbidities are more likely to go to private allopathic providers. What is more, there is no difference between public and private allopathic providers in patients’ perception of care except for perceived cost. Positive perceptions in both providers are very common except for perceptions in blood-sugar management, distance to facilities, and cost of care. Sixty-six percent of patients perceived their blood-sugar control to fluctuate or have no change versus improved control. Twenty-seven percent of patients perceived the distance to facilities as unreasonable, and sixty-two percent of patients perceived the cost as high for them. The results suggest that cost may affect low socioeconomic people’s choice of care significantly. However, for people in middle and higher socioeconomic groups, cost does not appear to be a major factor. For qualitative text analyses, physician’s behavior and reputation emerge as themes, which require further studies.