Abstract

Program Jaminan Persalinan (Jampersal) dirancang untuk meningkatkan akses ibu hamil pada fasilitas pelayanan kesehatan yang pada gilirannya berkontribusi terhadap penurunan kematian ibu. Artikel ini bertujuan menilai cakupan Jampersal di Kabupaten Bogor, Provinsi Jawa Barat dengan menggunakan sumber data sekunder yaitu profil kesehatan dan laporan kesehatan ibu dan anak (KIA) Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor tahun 2011. Cakupan Program Jaminan Persalinan yang meliputi pelayanan antenatal care (ANC), persalinan, dan pascapersalinan berada pada kisaran 2,67% _ 12,56%, dengan cakupan tertinggi pelayanan persalinan (12,56%). Berdasarkan uji analysis of variance (ANOVA) ditemukan perbedaan yang bermakna antara cakupan di wilayah pembangunan barat (25,05%), tengah (9,43%), dan timur (11,08%) (nilai p = 0,012). Uji multiple comparison menunjukkan perbedaan rata-rata cakupan Jaminan Persalinan di wilayah barat dan wilayah tengah yang bermakna (p = 0,011; IK 95% = 3,12 – 29,60). Perbedaan tersebut kemungkinan disebabkan oleh perbedaan intensitas sosialisasi program oleh petugas kesehatan dan elemen masyarakat. Sosialisasi meningkatkan pengenalan sasaran terhadap program tersebut, khususnya kelompok miskin. Perbedaan cakupan Jampersal dapat juga disebabkan oleh perbedaan cakupan jaminan kesehatan yang lain. Masyarakat yang sudah mempunyai jaminan kesehatan menjadi tidak berhak untuk mengikuti program Jampersal. Direkomendasikan untuk melakukan sosialisasi Jampersal yang difokuskan pada kelompok sasaran kategori miskin yang belum mempunyai jaminan kesehatan.

Delivery insurance (Jampersal) was designed to increase pregnant woman to access health care fasility that contributed to reduce maternal death. The study aimed to describe Jampersal coverage for delivery. It utilized Bogor District health profile and maternal and child health report 2011. Coverage of Jampersal was about 2,67-12,56%, for antenatal care, delivery care, and postnatal care, the highest coverage was for delivery (12,56%). Analysis of variance test showed the significance among the coverage in west (25,05%), central (9,43%), and east (11,08%) area (p = 0,012). Multiple comparison analysis then showed that difference coverage was significance between west and central area (p = 0,011; 95% CI = 3,12–29,60). Different coverage might be associated with the intensity of Jampersal promotion done by both health workers and communities. Promotion will be essential for the success of program due to its abili ty to increase the community recognition, particularly for lower socioeconomic group, to Jampersal. It also might be influenced by discrepancy of other health insurances coverage. Those who already had health insurance would not be eligible for Jampersal. It is recommended to increase the Jampersal promotion focused to the poor groups that have not been covered by any other health insurance.

References

1. Hernawati I. Analisis kematian ibu di Indonesia tahun 2010 Berdasarkan Data SDKI, Riskesdas dan Laporan Rutin KIA [cited 2012 Apr 15]. Available from: www.kesehatanibu.depkes.go.id/.../download.php?.

2. Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor. Profil kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor tahun 2010. Bogor: Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor; 2011.

3. Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor. Profil kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor tahun 2011. Bogor: Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor; 2012.

4. Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor. Laporan bulanan seksi KIA Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor 2011-2012. Bogor: Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Bogor; 2012.

5. Campbell OM, Graham WJ. Strategies for reducing maternal mortality: getting on with what works. Lancet. 2006; 368(9543):1284-99.

6. Douangvichit D, Liabsuetrakul T, McNeil E. Health care expenditure for hospital-based delivery care in Lao PDR. Bio-Medical Center Research Notes 2012. 2012; 5(30).

7. Agha S. Changes in the proportion of facility-based deliveries and related maternal health services among the poor in rural Jhang, Pakistan: results from a demand-side financing intervention. International Journal for Equity in Health. 2011; 10:57.

8. Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Republik Indonesia Nomor 2562/Menkes/Per/XII/2011 Tentang Petunjuk Teknis Jaminan Persalinan. Jakarta: Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia; 2011.

9. Rachmawati T. Studi evaluatif: implementasi jampersal di 14 kabupaten. Jakarta: Pusat Humaniora, Kebijakan Kesehatan dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kesehatan; 2012.

10. Trisnantoro L, Riyarto S, Tudiono. Monitoring pelaksanaan kebijakan BOK dan jampersal di DIY, Papua dan NTT. Yogyakarta: Pusat Manajemen Pelayanan Kesehatan Universitas Gadjah Mada dan United Nation Fund for Population Activities; 2012.

11. Azkha N. Pelaksanaan jampersal di Provinsi Sumatera Barat. Forum Nasional II: Jaringan Kebijakan Kesehatan Indonesia. 2011 Sept 28 -29; Makassar, Indonesia. Makassar: FK UNHAS; 2011.

12. Graham WJ, Fitzmaurice AE, Bell JS, Cairns JA. The familial technique for linking maternal death with poverty. Lancet. 2004; 363(9402): 23-7.

13. Shiffmann J. Generating political will for safe motherhood in Indonesia. Social Science & Medicine. 2003; 56 (6): 1197-207.

14. Sidney K, Diwan V, El-Khatib Z, de Costa A. India’s JSY cash transfer program for maternal health: Who participates and who doesn’t – a report from Ujjain district. Reproductive Health. 2012; 9: 2.

15. Abuya T, Njuki R, Warren CE, Okal J, Obare F, Kanya L, et al. A policy analysis of the implementation of a reproductive health vouchers program in Kenya. BMC Public Health. 2012; 12: 540.

16. Agha S. Impact of a maternal health voucher scheme on institutional delivery among low income women in Pakistan. Reproductive Health. 2011; 8: 10.

17. United Nation Fund for People Activities dan Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Laporan Hasil Kajian Pelaksanaan Program Jampersal Di 6 Kabupaten (A Working Document). Jakarta: United Nation Fund for People Activities dan Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia; 2011.

18. Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Profil Data Kesehatan Indonesia Tahun 2011. Jakarta: Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia; 2012.

19. Acuin CS, Khor GL, Liabsuetrakul T, Achadi EL, Htay TT, Firestone R, et al. Maternal, neonatal, and child health in South East Asia: towards greater regional collaboration. Lancet. 2011; 377(9764): 516-25.

20. Lewis G. Beyond the Numbers: reviewing maternal deaths and complications to make pregnancy. British Medical Bulletin. 2003; 67(1):27-37.

21. Senanayake H, Goonewardene M, Ranatunga A, Hattotuwa R, Amarasekera S, Amarasinghe I. Achieving millenium development goals 4 and 5 in Srilangka. British Journal Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2011; 118 (Suppl s2): 78-87.

22. Abor PA, Abekah-Nkrumah G, Sakyi K, Adjasi CKD, Abor J. The socioeconomic determinants of maternal health care utilization in Ghana. International Journal of Social Economics. 2011; 38(7): 628-48.

23. Celik Y, Hotchkiss DR. The socio-economic determinants of maternal health care utilization in Turkey. Social Science and Medicine. 2000; 50(12): 1797-806.

24. Sekabaraga C, Diop F, Soucat A. Can innovative health financing policies increase access to MDG-related services? Evidence from Rwanda. Health Policy and Planning. 2011; 26: ii52–ii62.

Download

Included in

Health Policy Commons

Share

COinS