NDC to privatize lab tests, dental care, eye exams, medications in public hospitals

The National Democratic Congress (NDC) has unveiled a new health policy proposal to allow private businesses to provide specific health services within public hospitals in Ghana.
The proposed franchising policy would outsource services such as laboratory tests, dental care, eye exams, and pharmacy services to private companies operating within the public healthcare infrastructure.
According to page 109 of the NDC’s manifesto, under section 5.2.7.1 titled “Franchising Policy for Health Service Delivery in Public Facilities,” the party’s plan is “to introduce a franchising policy to allow private health businesses to provide services including laboratory, dental, eye, and pharmaceutical services within public hospitals, based on best practice models.”
While this approach could enhance the range and quality of healthcare available in public hospitals, critics highlight potential challenges, particularly the cost implications for patients in a low-income country like Ghana.

Increased costs for patients
A key concern is the potential rise in healthcare costs for patients.
Privatizing services within public hospitals often leads to increased fees, as private businesses are profit-driven.
For uninsured patients, or those whose insurance offers limited coverage, the higher costs for services such as laboratory tests, dental treatments, and medications may pose a significant barrier.
In a country with a notable poverty rate, these costs could limit access to essential healthcare for many Ghanaians.

Risk to universal healthcare goals
The NDC’s proposal could also undermine Ghana’s efforts to provide universal healthcare.
Public health systems typically aim to deliver affordable or free healthcare services, particularly to low-income and vulnerable populations.
Introducing franchised private services within public hospitals might challenge this goal, as private providers prioritize profitability.
As a result, essential services in public hospitals may become inaccessible for lower-income patients, which would counteract the very purpose of a public healthcare system.

Reduced govt control over standards and pricing
If private companies are granted franchise operations within public hospitals, the government’s ability to regulate pricing and service standards may diminish.
Private providers may set prices according to market conditions rather than public health needs, leading to inconsistent service quality and affordability across hospitals.
This reduced oversight could introduce disparities in service delivery between facilities.

Potential emergence of a “two-tier” healthcare system
The introduction of private franchises within public hospitals could lead to a two-tier healthcare system.
Wealthier patients might gain easier access to private services, while lower-income patients may face longer wait times and reduced service quality.
This division could harm the equity of healthcare in Ghana, making public hospitals less accessible to those in greatest need.

Shift of public resources to support private profit
The franchising model may result in public hospitals allocating space, equipment, and administrative support to private franchises.
This reallocation could shift resources away from essential public health services, reducing the hospitals’ capacity to fulfill their primary mission.
Over time, this focus on profit-driven activities could detract from the hospitals’ ability to provide comprehensive public care.

Impact on job security for public sector health workers
Franchising may also pose risks to employment security for public healthcare workers.
Private operators could hire their own staff under different terms, often with lower benefits and job security than those provided by the government.
This shift could lead to dissatisfaction, staff turnover, and potential disruptions in service delivery within public hospitals.

Improved efficiency and quality of services
One of the possible advantages of the franchising policy is the introduction of private sector expertise, technology, and operational efficiency in areas such as lab services and pharmacies.
Private providers could invest in advanced equipment and staff training, improving diagnostic accuracy, speed, and overall quality.

Expanded access to specialized services
Public hospitals in Ghana often struggle to offer a full range of specialized services due to limited resources.
By partnering with private companies, public institutions could provide more comprehensive healthcare options, allowing patients to access specialized services without needing to visit multiple facilities.

Increased investment in health infrastructure
Private franchises may also contribute to developing the public health infrastructure by investing in advanced technology and modern equipment.
This could enhance the long-term capabilities of public hospitals, attracting skilled professionals and improving the quality of care available.

Revenue generation for public hospitals
Structured franchising agreements could generate additional revenue for public hospitals, with private companies paying fees or sharing profits in exchange for operating within these institutions.
This revenue could be used to fund essential services, facility improvements, and resources benefiting all patients.

Reduced burden on public sector resources
By outsourcing some services, the public healthcare system may alleviate some financial and operational pressure.
For instance, private labs could help manage the overflow of diagnostic tests, allowing public resources to focus on critical care areas and reducing patient wait times.
To mitigate negative impacts, experts recommend that Ghana’s government establish strict regulatory frameworks governing pricing, service standards, and access.
Ensuring affordability and accessibility across income groups will be crucial to maintaining equity within the public healthcare system.
Additionally, subsidies for low-income patients and transparent oversight mechanisms will be essential to achieving positive outcomes without compromising public health goals.

By Elvis Darko