Financial risk protection in health care in Bangladesh in the era of Universal Health Coverage

An Examination of Inter-State Variation in Utilization of Healthcare Services, Associated Financial Burden and Inequality: Evidence from Nationally Representative Survey in India

This study examines the health care utilization pattern, associated financial catastrophes, and inequality across Indian states to understand the subnational variations and aid the policy makers in this regard. Data from recent National Sample Survey (2017-2018), titled, "Household Social Consumption: Health," covering 113,823 households, was employed in the study. Descriptive statistics, Erreygers concentration index (CI), and recentered influence function decomposition were applied in the study. We found that, in India, 7 percent of households experienced catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and 1.9 percent of households were pushed below poverty line due to out-of-pocket expenditure on hospitalization. Notably, outpatient care was more burdensome (CHE: 12.1%; impoverishment: 4%). Substantial interstate variations were observed, with high financial burden in poorer states. Utilization of health care services from private health care providers was pro-rich (hospitalization CI 0.31; outpatient CI 0.10), while the occurrence of CHE incidence was pro-poor (hospitalization CI -0.10; outpatient CI -0.14). Education level, economic status, health insurance, and area of residence contributed significantly to inequalities in utilization of health care services from private providers and financial burden. The high financial burden of seeking health care necessitates the need to increase public health spending and strengthen public health infrastructure. Also, concerted efforts directed towards increasing awareness about health insurance and introducing comprehensive health insurance products (covering both inpatient and outpatient services) are imperative to augment financial risk protection in India.

Inequalities in Out-of-Pocket Health Expenditure Measured Using Financing Incidence Analysis (FIA): A Systematic Review

Government efforts and reforms in health financing systems in various countries are aimed at achieving universal health coverage. Household spending on healthcare plays a very important role in achieving this goal. The aim of this systematic review was to assess out-of-pocket health expenditure inequalities measured by the FIA across different territories, in the context of achieving UHC by 2030. A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify original quantitative and mixed-method studies published in the English language between 2016 and 2022. A total of 336 articles were initially identified, and after the screening process, 15 articles were included in the systematic review, following the removal of duplicates and articles not meeting the inclusion criteria. Despite the overall regressivity, insurance systems have generally improved population coverage and reduced inequality in out-of-pocket health expenditures among the employed population, but regional studies highlight the importance of examining the situation at a micro level. The results of the study provide further evidence supporting the notion that healthcare financing systems relying less on public funding and direct tax financing and more on private payments are associated with a higher prevalence of catastrophic health expenditures and demonstrate a more regressive pattern in terms of healthcare financing, highlighting the need for policy interventions to address these inequities. Governments face significant challenges in achieving universal health coverage due to inequalities experienced by financially vulnerable populations, including high out-of-pocket payments for pharmaceutical goods, informal charges, and regional disparities in healthcare financing administration.

Rural‒urban disparities in household catastrophic health expenditure in Bangladesh: a multivariate decomposition analysis

BACKGROUND

Rural‒urban disparity in catastrophic healthcare expenditure (CHE) is a well-documented challenge in low- and middle-income countries, including Bangladesh, limiting financial protection and hindering the achievement of the Universal Health Coverage target of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, the factors driving this divide remain poorly understood. Therefore, this study aims to identify the key determinants of the rural‒urban disparity in CHE incidence in Bangladesh and their changes over time.

METHODS

We used nationally representative data from the latest three rounds of the Bangladesh Household Income and Expenditure Survey (2005, 2010, and 2016). CHE incidence among households seeking healthcare was measured using the normative food, housing, and utilities method. To quantify covariate contributions to the rural‒urban CHE gap, we employed the Oaxaca-Blinder multivariate decomposition approach, adapted by Powers et al. for nonlinear response models.

RESULTS

CHE incidence among rural households increased persistently during the study period (2005: 24.85%, 2010: 25.74%, 2016: 27.91%) along with a significant (p-value ≤ 0.01) rural‒urban gap (2005: 9.74%-points, 2010: 13.94%-points, 2016: 12.90%-points). Despite declining over time, substantial proportions of CHE disparities (2005: 87.93%, 2010: 60.44%, 2016: 61.33%) are significantly (p-value ≤ 0.01) attributable to endowment differences between rural and urban households. The leading (three) covariate categories consistently contributing significantly (p-value ≤ 0.01) to the CHE gaps were composition disparities in the lowest consumption quintile (2005: 49.82%, 2010: 36.16%, 2016: 33.61%), highest consumption quintile (2005: 32.35%, 2010: 15.32%, 2016: 18.39%), and exclusive reliance on informal healthcare sources (2005: -36.46%, 2010: -10.17%, 2016: -12.58%). Distinctively, the presence of chronic illnesses in households emerged as a significant factor in 2016 (9.14%, p-value ≤ 0.01), superseding the contributions of composition differences in household heads with no education (4.40%, p-value ≤ 0.01) and secondary or higher education (7.44%, p-value ≤ 0.01), which were the fourth and fifth significant contributors in 2005 and 2010.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural‒urban differences in household economic status, educational attainment of household heads, and healthcare sources were the key contributors to the rural‒urban CHE disparity between 2005 and 2016 in Bangladesh, with chronic illness emerging as a significant factor in the latest period. Closing the rural‒urban CHE gap necessitates strategies that carefully address rural‒urban variations in the characteristics identified above.

Economic burden of non-communicable diseases on households in Nigeria: evidence from the Nigeria living standard survey 2018-19

BACKGROUND

The importance of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in Nigeria is reflected in their growing burden that is fast overtaking that of infectious diseases. As most NCD care is paid for through out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses, and NCDs tend to cause substantial income losses through chronic disabilities, the rising NCD-related health burden may also be economically detrimental. Given the lack of updated national-level evidence on the economic burden of NCDs in Nigeria, this study aims to produce new evidence on the extent of financial hardship experienced by households with NCDs in Nigeria due to OOP expenditure and productivity loss.

METHODS

This study analysed cross-sectional data from the most recent round (2018-19) of the Nigeria Living Standard Survey (NLSS). Household-level health and consumption data were used to estimate catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and impoverishing effects due to OOP health spending, using a more equitable method recently developed by the World Health Organization European region in 2018. The productivity loss by individuals with NCDs was also estimated from income and work-time loss data, applying the input-based human capital approach.

RESULTS

On average, a household with NCDs spent ₦ 122,313.60 or $ 398.52 per year on NCD care, representing 24% of household food expenditure. The study found that OOP on cancer treatment, mental problems, and renal diseases significantly contribute to the cost of NCD care. The OOP expenditure led to catastrophic and impoverishing outcomes for households. The estimations showed that about 30% of households with NCDs experienced CHE in 2018, using the WHO Europe method at the 40% threshold. The study also found that the cost of NCD medications was a significant driver of CHE among NCD-affected households. The results showed heterogeneity in CHE and impoverishment across states and geographical regions in Nigeria, with a higher concentration in rural and North East geopolitical locations. The study also found that 20% of NCD-affected households were impoverished or further impoverished by OOP payment, and another 10% were on the verge of impoverishment. The results showed a negligible rate of unmet needs among households with NCDs.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights the significant effect of NCDs on Nigerian households and the need for effective policy interventions to address this challenge, particularly among the poor and vulnerable.

Financial risk protection against noncommunicable diseases: trends and patterns in Bangladesh

BACKGROUND

Demographic and epidemiological transitions are changing the disease burden from infectious to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low- and middle-income countries, including Bangladesh. Given the rising NCD-related health burdens and growing share of household out-of-pocket (OOP) spending in total health expenditure in Bangladesh, we compared the country's trends and socioeconomic disparities in financial risk protection (FRP) among households with and without NCDs.

METHODS

We used data from three recent waves of the Bangladesh Household Income and Expenditure Survey (2005, 2010, and 2016) and employed the normative food, housing (rent), and utilities method to measure the levels and distributions of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and impoverishing effects of OOP health expenditure among households without NCDs (i.e. non-NCDs only) and with NCDs (i.e. NCDs only, and both NCDs and non-NCDs). Additionally, we examined the incidence of forgone care for financial reasons at the household and individual levels.

RESULTS

Between 2005 and 2016, OOP expenses increased by more than 50% across all households (NCD-only: USD 95.6 to 149.3; NCD-and-non-NCD: USD 89.5 to 167.7; non-NCD-only: USD 45.3 to 73.0), with NCD-affected families consistently spending over double that of non-affected households. Concurrently, CHE incidence grew among NCD-only families (13.5% to 14.4%) while declining (with fluctuations) among non-NCD-only (14.4% to 11.6%) and NCD-and-non-NCD households (12.9% to 12.2%). Additionally, OOP-induced impoverishment increased among NCD-only and non-NCD-only households from 1.4 to 2.0% and 1.1 to 1.5%, respectively, affecting the former more. Also, despite falling over time, NCD-affected individuals more frequently mentioned prohibiting treatment costs as the reason for forgoing care than the non-affected (37.9% vs. 13.0% in 2016). The lowest quintile households, particularly those with NCDs, consistently experienced many-fold higher CHE and impoverishment than the highest quintile. Notably, CHE and impoverishment effects were more pronounced among NCD-affected families if NCD-afflicted household members were female rather than male, older people, or children instead of working-age adults.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of FRP is more pronounced among households with NCDs than those without NCDs. Concerted efforts are required to ensure FRP for all families, particularly those with NCDs.