The effect of cost-sharing design characteristics on use of health care recommended by the treating physician; a discrete choice experiment

Monitoring progress towards universal health coverage in Europe: a descriptive analysis of financial protection in 40 countries

Background

Ensuring that access to health care is affordable for everyone-financial protection-is central to universal health coverage (UHC). Financial protection is commonly measured using indicators of financial barriers to access (unmet need for health care) and financial hardship caused by out-of-pocket payments for health care (impoverishing and catastrophic health spending). We aim to assess financial hardship and unmet need in Europe and identify the coverage policy choices that undermine financial protection.

Methods

We carry out a cross-sectional study of financial hardship in 40 countries in Europe in 2019 (the latest available year of data before COVID-19) using microdata from national household budget surveys. We define impoverishing health spending as out-of-pocket payments that push households below or further below a relative poverty line and catastrophic health spending as out-of-pocket payments that exceed 40% of a household's capacity to pay for health care. We link these results to survey data on unmet need for health care, dental care, and prescribed medicines and information on two aspects of coverage policy at country level: the main basis for entitlement to publicly financed health care and user charges for covered services.

Findings

Out-of-pocket payments for health care lead to financial hardship and unmet need in every country in the study, particularly for people with low incomes. Impoverishing health spending ranges from under 1% of households (in six countries) to 12%, with a median of 3%. Catastrophic health spending ranges from under 1% of households (in two countries) to 20%, with a median of 6%. Catastrophic health spending is consistently concentrated in the poorest fifth of the population and is largely driven by out-of-pocket payments for outpatient medicines, medical products, and dental care-all forms of treatment that should be an essential part of primary care. The median incidence of catastrophic health spending is three times lower in countries that cover over 99% of the population than in countries that cover less than 99%. In 16 out of the 17 countries that cover less than 99% of the population, the basis for entitlement is payment of contributions to a social health insurance (SHI) scheme. Countries that give greater protection from user charges to people with low incomes have lower levels of catastrophic health spending.

Interpretation

It is challenging to identify with certainty the coverage policy choices that undermine financial protection due to the complexity of the policies involved and the difficulty of disentangling the effects of different choices. The conclusions we draw are therefore tentative, though plausible. Countries are more likely to move towards UHC if they reduce out-of-pocket payments in a progressive way, decreasing them for people with low incomes first. Coverage policy choices that seem likely to achieve this include de-linking entitlement from payment of SHI contributions; expanding the coverage of outpatient medicines, medical products, and dental care; limiting user charges; and strengthening protection against user charges, particularly for people with low incomes.

Funding

The European Union (DG SANTE and DG NEAR) and the Government of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, Spain.

Prescription practices of physicians, quality of care, and patients' safety: A mixed methods comprehensive study

Objectives

Amidst inconsistent prescribing patterns and potentially harmful medication errors in the field of medical practice, this study endeavored to explore the prescription practices of physicians in Rawalpindi metropolitan city in Pakistan.

Methods

A mixed method study was conducted based on the analysis of 1232 prescriptions gathered from 16 pharmacies, along with in-depth interviews with 13 practicing physicians. The prescriptions were assessed for legibility, polypharmacy, patient details, history, diagnosis, and other relevant information. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the prevalence of various aspects of prescription accuracy was calculated. Thematic analysis was conducted on the qualitative data.

Results

Almost half of the prescriptions were from the private general practitioners, and the rest were from hospital-based doctors and consultants. Only a small percentage of prescriptions were fully legible, and many had incomplete or missing patient information, medical history, and diagnosis. Polypharmacy was also found to be prevalent, with significant differences in prescription accuracy across different medical specialties. The absence of continuing medical education, influence of pharmaceutical industry, and overcrowded practice settings drive the doctors to prescription practices. On the user side, perception of polypharmacy, patient-physician communication, and availability and cost of medicines emerged as major themes.

Conclusion

There is an obvious need to improve prescription accuracy regarding patient safety on the whole. Increased investment in health-care infrastructure, greater access to continuing medical education, and a commitment to promote evidence-based medicine could make a difference. Prescription practices must be safe, effective, and aligned with the latest advances in medical science.

Associations of Cost Sharing With Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Burden

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the regional variation of cost sharing and associations with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease burden in the US.

METHODS

Patients with RA from rheumatology practices in Northeast, South, and West US regions were evaluated. Sociodemographics, RA disease status, and comorbidities were collected, and Rheumatic Disease Comorbidity Index (RDCI) score was calculated. Primary insurance types and copay for office visits (OVs) and medications were documented. Univariable pairwise differences between regions were conducted, and multivariable regression models were estimated to evaluate associations of RDCI with insurance, geographical region, and race.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 402 predominantly female, White patients with RA, most received government versus private sponsored primary insurance (40% vs. 27.9%). Disease activity and RDCI were highest for patients in the South region, where copays for OVs were more frequently more than $25. Copays for OVs and medications were less than $10 in 45% and 31.8% of observations, respectively, and more prevalent in the Northeast and West patient subsets than in the South subset. Overall, RDCI score was significantly higher for OV copays less than $10 as well as for medication copays less than $25, both independent of region or race. Additionally, RDCI was significantly lower for privately insured than Medicare individuals (RDCI -0.78, 95% CI [-0.41 to -1.15], P < 0.001) and Medicaid (RDCI -0.83, 95% CI [-0.13 to -1.54], P = 0.020), independent of region and race.

CONCLUSION

Cost sharing may not facilitate optimum care for patients with RA, especially in the Southern regions. More support may be required of government insurance plans to accommodate patients with RA with a high disease burden.

Medicaid Coverage for Podiatric Care: A National Survey

OBJECTIVES

Medicaid provides health insurance for low-income people meeting specific eligibility requirements. It is funded and administered by both the federal and state governments; this decentralization leads to vastly different programs across the country. The objective of this legal surveillance project was to describe state-by-state differences in podiatric care coverage for nonelderly adults across Medicaid programs.

METHODS

We used policy surveillance, a form of advanced legal mapping. It is the systematic collection and analysis of written policies across jurisdictions. Policy surveillance captures the important features of law through a rigorous scientific process to turn these policies into structured, quantitative legal data that are suitable for further evaluation or modeling. Data for the 51 jurisdictions were current as of September 1, 2020.

RESULTS

The vast majority of jurisdictions (82%) covered podiatric services for all classes of Medicaid beneficiaries, but the rules, restrictions, and limitations around coverage differed. Twenty-five jurisdictions had no limits on the number of podiatric visits during a specified period; 26 jurisdictions indicated a cap. Ten jurisdictions had no explicit limitations on coverage of routine foot care, whereas 33 jurisdictions covered routine foot care only when medically necessary or with a triggering condition. Eight jurisdictions did not cover routine foot care at all, and 28 jurisdictions required prior authorizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Podiatric care coverage, which is often preventive, varies greatly by state. This variability in coverage, which has not been previously tracked at the level of detail provided in our study, has implications for cost and health outcomes. The value of podiatric care is especially apparent in Medicaid populations. The compilation of these data can serve as a valuable resource for clinicians, researchers, and policy makers.

Factors Associated with Willingness to Pay for Cost-Sharing under Universal Health Coverage Scheme in Yogyakarta, Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

National Health Insurance (NHI) in Indonesia requires an appropriate cost-sharing policy, particularly for diseases that require the largest financing. This study examined factors that influence willingness to pay (WTP) for cost-sharing under the universal health coverage scheme among patients with catastrophic illnesses in Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study using structured questionnaires through direct interviews. The factors related to the WTP for cost-sharing under the NHI scheme in Indonesia were identified by a bivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Two out of every five (41.2%) participants had willingness to pay for cost-sharing. Sex [AOR = 0.69 (0.51, 0.92)], education [AOR = 1.54 (0.67, 3.55)], family size [AOR = 1.71 (1.07, 2.73)], occupation [AOR = 1.35 (0.88, 2.07)], individual income [AOR = 1.50 (0.87, 2.61)], household income [AOR = 1.47 (0.90, 2.39)], place of treatment [AOR = 2.54 (1.44, 4.45)], a health insurance plan [AOR = 1.22 (0.87, 1.71)], and whether someone receives an inpatient or outpatient service [AOR = 0.23 (0.10, 0.51)] were found to affect the WTP for a cost-sharing scheme with p < 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare (place of treatment, health insurance plan, and whether someone receives an inpatient or outpatient service) and individual socioeconomic (sex, educational, family size, occupational, income) factors were significantly related to the WTP for cost-sharing.

Multimorbidity and out-of-pocket expenditure for medicines in China and India

Introduction

Using nationally representative survey data from China and India, this study examined (1) the distribution and patterns of multimorbidity in relation to socioeconomic status and (2) association between multimorbidity and out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) for medicines by socioeconomic groups.

Methods

Secondary data analysis of adult population aged 45 years and older from WHO Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE) India 2015 (n=7397) and China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) 2015 (n=11 570). Log-linear, two-parts, zero-inflated and quantile regression models were performed to assess the association between multimorbidity and OOPE for medicines in both countries. Quantile regression was adopted to assess the observed relationship across OOPE distributions.

Results

Based on 14 (11 self-reported) and 9 (8 self-reported) long-term conditions in the CHARLS and SAGE datasets, respectively, the prevalence of multimorbidity in the adult population aged 45 and older was found to be 63.4% in China and 42.2% in India. Of those with any long-term health condition, 38.6% in China and 20.9% in India had complex multimorbidity. Multimorbidity was significantly associated with higher OOPE for medicines in both countries (p<0.05); an additional physical long-term condition was associated with a 18.8% increase in OOPE for medicine in China (p<0.05) and a 20.9% increase in India (p<0.05). Liver disease was associated with highest increase in OOPE for medicines in China (61.6%) and stroke in India (131.6%). Diabetes had the second largest increase (China: 58.4%, India: 91.6%) in OOPE for medicines in both countries.

Conclusion

Multimorbidity was associated with substantially higher OOPE for medicines in China and India compared with those without multimorbidity. Our findings provide supporting evidence of the need to improve financial protection for populations with an increased burden of chronic diseases in low-income and middle-income countries.

Understanding patient and physician responses to various cost-sharing programs for prescription drugs in South Korea: A multilevel analysis

Introduction

Patient and/or physician responses are a pivotal issue in designing rational cost-sharing programs under health insurance systems.

Objectives

This study aims to understand patient and/or physician responses to cost-sharing programs designed for prescription drugs in South Korea.

Methods

As a framework, we took advantage of a tiered cost-sharing program, including from copayment to coinsurance (threshold 1) and reduced coinsurance (threshold 2). Given the hierarchical structure of prescriptions nested within patients, we utilized a multilevel analysis to assess effects of various cost-sharing programs on patient and/or physician responses using National Health Insurance claims data from 2018.

Results

We found that a tiered cost-sharing program was effective in changing the behaviors of patients and/or physicians. Threshold 1 was found to be more effective than threshold 2 in changing their behaviors. At the prescription level, sensitivity to cost-sharing programs was associated with prescribed days of treatment and locations of prescription. In a similar vein, sensitivity to cost-sharing programs was associated with gender and age group of patients.

Conclusion

A simplified cost-sharing program with extended intervals should be considered to rationalize cost-sharing programs. Specifically, a cost-sharing program designed for long-term prescriptions for chronic diseases together with an emphasis on cost transparency is required to better guide price-conscious decisions by patients and/or physicians.

Multidisciplinary Firms and the Treatment of Chronic Pain: A Case Study of Low Back Pain

Sixteen million people suffer with chronic low back pain and related healthcare expenditures can be as high as $USD 635 billion. Current pain treatments help a significant number of acute pain patients, allowing them to obtain various treatments and then “exit the market for pain services” quickly. However, chronic patients remain in pain and need multiple, varying treatments over time. Often, a single pain provider does not oversee their care. Here, we analyze the current pain market and suggest ways to establish a new treatment paradigm. We posit that more cost effective treatment and better pain relief can be achieved with multi-disciplinary care with a provider team overseeing care.

How important is income in explaining individuals having forgone healthcare due to cost-sharing payments? Results from a mixed methods sequential explanatory study

Background

Patients having forgone healthcare because of the costs involved has become more prevalent in recent years. Certain patient characteristics, such as income, are known to be associated with a stronger demand-response to cost-sharing. In this study, we first assess the relative importance of patient characteristics with regard to having forgone healthcare due to cost-sharing payments, and then employ qualitative methods in order to understand these findings better.

Methods

Survey data was collected from a Dutch panel of regular users of healthcare. Logistic regression models and dominance analyses were performed to assess the relative importance of patient characteristics, i.e., personal characteristics, health, educational level, sense of mastery and financial situation. Semi-structured interviews (n = 5) were conducted with those who had forgone healthcare. The verbatim transcribed interviews were thematically analyzed.

Results

Of the 7,339 respondents who completed the questionnaire, 1,048 respondents (14.3%) had forgone healthcare because of the deductible requirement. The regression model indicated that having a higher income reduced the odds of having forgone recommended healthcare due to the deductible (odds ratios of higher income categories relative to the lowest income category (reference): 0.29–0.49). However, dominance analyses revealed that financial leeway was more important than income: financial leeway contributed the most (34.8%) to the model’s overall McFadden’s pseudo-R2 (i.e., 0.123), followed by income (25.6%). Similar results were observed in stratified models and in population weighted models. Qualitative analyses distinguished four main themes that affected the patient’s decision whether to use healthcare: financial barriers, structural barriers related to the complex design of cost-sharing programs, individual considerations of the patient, and the perceived lack of control regarding treatment choices within a given treatment trajectory. Furthermore, “having forgone healthcare” seemed to have a negative connotation.

Conclusion

Our findings show that financial leeway is more important than income with respect to having forgone recommended healthcare due to cost-sharing payments, and that other factors such as the perceived necessity of healthcare also matter. Our findings imply that solely adapting cost-sharing programs to income levels will only get one so far. Our study underlines the need for a broader perspective in the design of cost-sharing programs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07527-z.

Costs of breast cancer treatment incurred by women in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of research on the cost of breast cancer (BC) treatment from the patient's perspective in Vietnam.

METHODS

Individual-level data about out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures on use of services were collected from women treated for BC (n = 202) using an online survey and a face-to-face interview at two tertiary hospitals in 2019. Total expenditures on diagnosis and initial BC treatment were presented in terms of the mean, standard deviation, and range for each type of service use. A generalised linear model (GLM) was used to assess the relationship between total cost and socio-demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

19.3% of respondents had stage 0/I BC, 68.8% had stage II, 9.4% had stage III, none had stage IV. The most expensive OOP elements were targeted therapy with mean cost equal to 649.5 million VND ($28,025) and chemotherapy at 36.5 million VND ($1575). Mean total OOP cost related to diagnosis and initial BC treatment (excluding targeted therapy cost) was 61.8 million VND ($2667). The mean OOP costs among patients with stage II and III BC were, respectively, 66 and 148% higher than stage 0/I.

CONCLUSIONS

BC patients in Vietnam incur significant OOP costs. The cost of BC treatment was driven by the use of therapies and presentation stage at diagnosis. It is likely that OOP costs of BC patients would be reduced by earlier detection through raised awareness and screening programmes and by providing a higher insurance reimbursement rate for targeted therapy.