Private expenditure and the role of private health insurance in Greece: status quo and future trends

The health care system in Greece is financed in almost equal proportions by public and private sources. Private expenditure, consists mostly of out-of-pocket and under-the-table payments. Such payments strongly suggest dissatisfaction with the public system, due to under financing during the last 25 years. This gap has been filled rapidly by the private sector. From this point of view, one might suggest that the flourishing development of private provision may lead in turn to a corresponding growth in private health insurance (PHI). This paper aims to examine the role of PHI in Greece, to identify the factors influencing its development, and to make some suggestions about future policies and trends. In the decade of 1985–1995 PHI show increasing activity, reflecting the intention of some citizens to seek health insurance solutions in the form of supplementary cover in order to ensure faster access, better quality of services, and increased consumer choice. The benefits include programs covering hospital expenses, cash benefits, outpatient care expenses, disability income insurance, as well as limited managed care programs. However, despite recent interest, PHI coverage remains low in Greece compared to other EU countries. Economic, social and cultural factors such as low average household income, high unemployment, obligatory and full coverage by social insurance, lead to reluctance to pay for second-tier insurance. Instead, there is a preference to pay a doctor or hospital directly even in the form of under-the-table payments (which are remarkably high in Greece), when the need arises. There are also factors endogenous to the PHI industry, related to market policies, low organisational capacity, cream skimming, and the absence of insurance products meeting consumer requirements, which explain the relatively low state of development of PHI in Greece.      

Willingness to pay for rural health insurance through community participation in India

The main objective of this article is to examine the willingness to pay for a viable rural health insurance scheme through community participation in India, and the policy concerns it engenders. The willingness to pay for a rural health insurance scheme through community participation is estimated through a contingent valuation approach (logit model), by using the rural household survey on health from Karnataka State in India. The results show that insurance/saving schemes are popular in rural areas. In fact, people have relatively good knowledge of insurance schemes (especially life insurance) rather than saving schemes. Most of the people stated they are willing to join and pay for the proposed rural health insurance scheme. However, the probability of willingness to join was found to be greater than the probability of willingness to pay. Indeed, socio-economic factors and physical accessibility to quality health services appeared to be significant determinants of willingness to join and pay for such a scheme. The main justification for the willingness to pay for a proposed rural health insurance scheme are attributed from household survey results: (a) the existing government health care provider's services is not quality oriented; (b) is not easily accessible; and, (c) is not cost effective. The discussion suggests that policy makers in India should take serious note of the growing influence of the private sector and people's willingness to pay for organizing a rural health insurance scheme to provide quality and efficient health care in India. Policy interventions in health should not ignore private sector existence and people's willingness to pay for such a scheme and these two factors should be explicitly involved in the health management process. It is also argued that regulatory and supportive policy interventions are inevitable to promote this sector's viable and appropriate development in organizing a health insurance scheme.     

Usability and acceptability of the software ‘Arogya Sahyog’ to assess non-communicable diseases in rural India

BackgroundIn rural regions with few doctors to manage non-communicable diseases (NCDs), people rely on community health workers (CHWs). We developed a tablet-based decision support application (app), called ‘Arogya Sahyog’, to support CHWs in the field.ObjectiveTo assess usability of the app for screening, providing lifestyle advice, and referring patients with NCDs to health centers.MethodsSixteen CHWs in the Tehri Garhwal district of India underwent a five-day training program in November 2019. We assessed: (i) acceptability: through a self-administered questionnaire; (ii) fidelity: by comparing the app data with ‘pre-set’ responses, and (iii) usability: through the validated system usability scale (SUS). The ‘Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT)’ framework was used to identify enablers of, and barriers to, use of the app.ResultsUsability on the SUS was 88.3% (95% confidence interval 85.6-92.0%), with ratings between ‘excellent’ and ‘best imaginable’. Most CHWs (87-93%) reported that the app was user-friendly, had a pleasing color scheme, and was entertaining to use. Human error on data entry was < 4%, with most errors being in free-text fields. Four main themes were identified in using the app: ‘strengths’ (clear instructions), ‘weaknesses’ (difficulty in using the inbuilt keyboard), opportunities’ (high motivation), and ‘threats’ (increased workload and interference with their routine work).ConclusionArogya Sahyog was well accepted and achieved an excellent usability rating, supporting its use by CHWs. The next step is to test whether CHWs can use the app to identify and manage people with NCDs in the community.     

Combined social and private health insurance versus catastrophic out of pocket payments for private hospital care in Greece

The high level of out of pocket (OOP) payments constitutes a major concern for Greece and several other European and OECD countries as a result of the significant down turning of their public health finances due to the 2008 financial crisis. The basic objective of this study is to provide empirical evidence on the effect of combining social health insurance (SHI) and private health insurance (PHI) on OOP payments. Further, this study examines the catastrophic impact of OOP payments on insured’s welfare using the incidence and intensity methodological approach of measuring catastrophic health care expenditures. Conducting a cross-sectional survey in Greece in 2013, we find that the combination of SHI–PHI has a strong negative influence on insured OOP payments for inpatient health care in private hospitals. Furthermore, our results indicate that SHI coverage is not sufficient by itself to manage with this issue. Moreover, we find that poor people present a greater tendency to incur catastrophic OOP expenditures for hospital health care in private providers. Drawing evidence from Greece, a country with huge fiscal problems that has suffered the consequences of the economic crisis more than any other, could be a starting point for policymakers to consider the perspective of SHI–PHI co-operation against OOP payments more seriously.     

Primary care physicians’ perspective on financial issues and adult immunization in the Era of the Affordable Care Act

BackgroundFinancial barriers to adult vaccination are poorly understood. Our objectives were to assess among general internists (GIM) and family physicians (FP) shortly after Affordable Care Act (ACA) implementation: (1) proportion of adult patients deferring or refusing vaccines because of cost and frequency of physicians not recommending vaccines for financial reasons; (2) satisfaction with reimbursement for vaccine purchase and administration by payer type; (3) knowledge of Medicare coverage of vaccines; and (4) awareness of vaccine-specific provisions of the ACA.MethodsWe administered an Internet and mail survey from June to October 2013 to national networks of 438 GIMs and 401 FPs.ResultsResponse rates were 72% (317/438) for GIM and 59% (236/401) for FP. Among physicians who routinely recommended vaccines, up to 24% of GIM and 30% of FP reported adult patients defer or refuse certain vaccines for financial reasons most of the time. Physicians reported not recommending vaccines because they thought the patient’s insurance would not cover it (35%) or the patient could be vaccinated more affordably elsewhere (38%). Among physicians who saw patients with this insurance, dissatisfaction (‘very dissatisfied’) was highest for payments received from Medicaid (16% vaccine purchase, 14% vaccine administration) and Medicare Part B (11% vaccine purchase, 11% vaccine administration). Depending on the vaccine, 36–71% reported not knowing how Medicare covered the vaccine. Thirty-seven percent were ‘not at all aware’ and 19% were ‘a little aware’ of vaccine-specific provisions of the ACA.ConclusionsPatients are refusing and physicians are not recommending adult vaccinations for financial reasons. Increased knowledge of private and public insurance coverage for adult vaccinations might position physicians to be more likely to recommend vaccines and better enable them to refer patients to other vaccine providers when a particular vaccine or vaccines are not offered in the practice.     

Modelling the affordability and distributional implications of future health care financing options in South Africa

South Africa is considering introducing a universal health care system. A key concern for policy-makers and the general public is whether or not this reform is affordable. Modelling the resource and revenue generation requirements of alternative reform options is critical to inform decision-making. This paper considers three reform scenarios: universal coverage funded by increased allocations to health from general tax and additional dedicated taxes; an alternative reform option of extending private health insurance coverage to all formal sector workers and their dependents with the remainder using tax-funded services; and maintaining the status quo. Each scenario was modelled over a 15-year period using a spreadsheet model. Statistical analyses were also undertaken to evaluate the impact of options on the distribution of health care financing burden and benefits from using health services across socio-economic groups. Universal coverage would result in total health care spending levels equivalent to 8.6% of gross domestic product (GDP), which is comparable to current spending levels. It is lower than the status quo option (9.5% of GDP) and far lower than the option of expanding private insurance cover (over 13% of GDP). However, public funding of health services would have to increase substantially. Despite this, universal coverage would result in the most progressive financing system if the additional public funding requirements are generated through a surcharge on taxable income (but not if VAT is increased). The extended private insurance scheme option would be the least progressive and would impose a very high payment burden; total health care payments on average would be 10.7% of household consumption expenditure compared with the universal coverage (6.7%) and status quo (7.5%) options. The least pro-rich distribution of service benefits would be achieved under universal coverage. Universal coverage is affordable and would promote health system equity, but needs careful design to ensure its long-term sustainability.     

Insured yet vulnerable: out-of-pocket payments and India's poor

Protecting households from high out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for health care is an important health system goal. High OOP payments can push households into poverty and make them vulnerable to catastrophic health expenditures. This study, based in India, aims to: (a) estimate OOP payments for health and related impoverishment across economic groups; (b) decompose OOP payments and relate the contribution of their components to impoverishment; and (c) examine how well recently introduced national insurance schemes meant for the poor are able to provide financial protection. The analysis of nationally representative data from India shows that 3.5% of the population fall below the poverty line and 5% households suffer catastrophic health expenditures. The poverty deepening impact of OOP payments was at a maximum in people below the poverty line in comparison with those above (Rs. 10.45 vs. Rs. 1.50, respectively). Medicines constitute the main share (72%) of total OOP payments. This share reaches 82% for outpatient care, compared with 42% for inpatient care. Removing OOP payments for inpatient care leads to a negligible fall in the poverty headcount ratio and poverty gap. However, if OOP payments for either medicines or outpatient care are removed then only 0.5% people fall into poverty due to spending on health. These findings suggest that insurance schemes which cover only hospital expenses, like those being rolled out nationally in India, will fail to adequately protect the poor against impoverishment due to spending on health. Further, issues related to identifying the poor and their targeting also constrain the scheme's impact. A broader coverage of benefits, to include medicines and outpatient care for the poor and near poor (i.e. those just above the poverty line), is necessary to achieve significant protection from impoverishment.     

Lower-income families pay a higher share of income toward national health care spending than higher-income families do

All health care spending from public and private sources, such as governments and businesses, is ultimately paid by individuals and families. We calculated the burden of US health care spending on families as a percentage of income and found that at the national level, lower-income families pay a larger share of their incomes toward health care than do higher-income families. Specifically, we found that payments made privately, such as those for health insurance or out-of-pocket spending for care, and publicly, through taxes and tax expenditures, consumed more than 20 percent of family income for families in the lowest-income quintile but no more than 16 percent for families in any other income quintile. Our analysis provides a framework for considering the equity of various initiatives under health reform. Although many effects remain to be seen, we find that, overall, the Affordable Care Act should reduce inequities in the burden of paying for national health care spending.     

Regulating private health insurance: The reality behind the rhetoric in Uganda

Abstract

The continued preponderance of large health budget deficits in low-income countries has led to increasing international debate over the role that private health insurance could play in providing additional financing for health. However, the market failures inherent to insurance constitute a major concern and proponents are now advocating that states employ calculated regulations to offset these tendencies. This article uses an examination of the policy evolution of the Government of Uganda to demonstrate how one low-income country has heeded the call for regulation yet, so far, has remained unable to implement the resulting policies. In doing so, the case study exposes the contradiction underlying the impetus for the state to regulate private health insurance in low-income settings, namely, that while private health insurance is advanced as one response to the failure of the nation state and its inability to provide adequate health services for its population, the same ‘failing’ state is now being called upon to govern against the market failures inherent to the product.     

Reimagining Patient Data Access for Researchers

ObjectivesWidespread use of electronic health records (EHRs) now makes it feasible to expand beyond health insurance claims data to include full EHR data for health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) studies. We seek to develop ways to maximize researcher access to such data while strongly protecting patients’ privacy rights.MethodsWe analyzed alternative organizational structures and intellectual property rights assignments as they now exist and compared these with structures and intellectual property rights assignments that would maximize access to data for HEOR studies and minimize transactions costs. We analyzed data protection requirements and financial incentives at 3 levels: patient decision making, patients’ data aggregators, and final aggregation across patients’ data.ResultsCreating new HEOR data systems requires new organizations and funding, while also protecting patients’ data privacy rights. The Cures Act enables a new market for trusted third parties (TTPs) to aggregate patients’ data. New secondary data aggregators must combine individuals’ aggregated EHRs into usable HEOR databases. Maximal patient participation requires complete health insurance coverage of costs that healthcare providers charge for transmitting patients’ data to TTPs. The new secondary system to aggregate data from many TTPs into usable HEOR optimally has external funding.ConclusionsImportant steps remain uncompleted to achieve maximally available HEOR data while protecting patients’ privacy rights. HEOR information is a public good, so private incentives to support creation and operation of this new system remain incomplete. Public and private support can expand this system to optimally improve people’s health.     

Healthcare financing in Yemen

Yemen is a low‐middle‐income country where more than half of the population live in rural areas and lack access to the most basic health care. At US$40 per capita, Yemen's annual total health expenditure (THE) is among the lowest worldwide. This study analyses the preconditions and options for implementing basic social health protection in Yemen. It reveals a four‐tiered healthcare system characterised by high geographic and financial access barriers mainly for the poor. Out‐of‐pocket payments constitute 55% of THE, and cost‐sharing exemption schemes are not well organised. Resource‐allocation practices are inequitable because about 30% of THE gets spent on treatment abroad for a small number of patients, mainly from better‐off families. Against the background of a lack of social health protection, a series of small‐scale and often informal solidarity schemes have developed, and a number of public and private companies have set up health benefit schemes for their employees. Employment‐based schemes usually provide reasonable health care at an average annual cost of YR44 000 (US$200) per employee. In contrast, civil servants contribute to a mandatory health‐insurance scheme without receiving any additional health benefits in return. A number of options for initiating a pathway towards a universal health‐insurance system are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

“Every interaction you have …should be an opportunity to discuss and offer influenza vaccination”. Health service perspectives on influenza vaccination promotion and delivery to Aboriginal families living in New South Wales,Australia

IntroductionThere is little research to understand reasons for suboptimal influenza vaccination uptake among Aboriginal people of different ages in Australia. This study aimed to better understand the communication needs and preferences of Aboriginal families (Phase 2) in New South Wales, Australia, and their health service providers (Phase 1), to inform future interventions to improve influenza immunisation coverage in Aboriginal communities. This paper reports from Phase 1 of the study.Material and methodsAboriginal and non-Aboriginal researchers designed and conducted the study, with cultural governance provided by Aboriginal health care professionals and other community members working within health departments or community healthcare settings across Australia. In Phase 1 we conducted interviews and focus groups with 18 Aboriginal immunisation providers and mainstream immunisation co-ordinators from three geographic areas in New South Wales. We used group-based thematic analysis with a cultural lens and sought participants’ feedback prior to finalising results.ResultsWe identified four themes, framed as opportunities for improvement: better supporting Aboriginal Medical Services as providers of influenza vaccinations; improving the accessibility and appropriateness of mainstream services for Aboriginal families; improving health providers’ knowledge of Aboriginal people’ influenza risk and their willingness to recommend vaccination; and engaging communities to design influenza vaccination resources.ConclusionsTo achieve optimal influenza vaccination coverage, all health services must take responsibility for providing culturally responsive clinical care to Aboriginal families. We suggest that, where possible, mainstream services incorporate elements of the family-centred and broader model of health used by Aboriginal Medical Services. This includes creating a welcoming environment, appropriately identifying and getting to know Aboriginal patients, taking a preventative approach, and opportunistically offering and strongly encouraging influenza vaccination to the individual and their family.     

Health in China and India: a cross-country comparison in a context of rapid globalisation

China and India are similarly huge nations currently experiencing rapid economic growth, urbanisation and widening inequalities between rich and poor. They are dissimilar in terms of their political regimes, policies for population growth and ethnic composition and heterogeneity. This review compares health and health care in China and India within the framework of the epidemiological transition model and against the backdrop of globalisation. We identify similarities and differences in health situation. In general, for both countries, infectious diseases of the past sit alongside emerging infectious diseases and chronic illnesses associated with ageing societies, although the burden of infectious diseases is much higher in India. Whilst globalisation contributes to widening inequalities in health and health care in both countries--particularly with respect to increasing disparities between urban and rural areas and between rich and poor--there is evidence that local circumstances are important, especially with respect to the structure and financing of health care and the implementation of health policy. For example, India has huge problems providing even rudimentary health care to its large population of urban slum dwellers whilst China is struggling to re-establish universal rural health insurance. In terms of funding access to health care, the Chinese state has traditionally supported most costs, whereas private insurance has always played a major role in India, although recent changes in China have seen the burgeoning of private health care payments. China has, arguably, had more success than India in improving population health, although recent reforms have severely impacted upon the ability of the Chinese health care system to operate effectively. Both countries are experiencing a decline in the amount of government funding for health care and this is a major issue that must be addressed.     

The variance of length of stay and the optimal DRG outlier payments

Prospective payment schemes in health care often include supply-side insurance for cost outliers. In hospital reimbursement, prospective payments for patient discharges, based on their classification into diagnosis related group (DRGs), are complemented by outlier payments for long stay patients. The outlier scheme fixes the length of stay (LOS) threshold, constraining the profit risk of the hospitals. In most DRG systems, this threshold increases with the standard deviation of the LOS distribution. The present paper addresses the adequacy of this DRG outlier threshold rule for risk-averse hospitals with preferences depending on the expected value and the variance of profits. It first shows that the optimal threshold solves the hospital’s tradeoff between higher profit risk and lower premium loading payments. It then demonstrates for normally distributed truncated LOS that the optimal outlier threshold indeed decreases with an increase in the standard deviation.      

At What Cost? Payment for Abortion Care by U.S. Women

BackgroundMost U.S. abortion patients are poor or low-income, yet most pay several hundred dollars out of pocket for these services. This study explores how women procure these funds.MethodsiPad-administered surveys were implemented among 639 women obtaining abortions at six geographically diverse healthcare facilities. Women provided information about insurance coverage, payment for service, acquisition of funds, and ancillary costs incurred.FindingsOnly 36% of the sample lacked health insurance, but at least 69% were paying out of pocket for abortion care. Women were twice as likely to pay using Medicaid (16% of abortions) than private health insurance (7%). The most common reason women were not using private insurance was because it did not cover the procedure (46%), or they were unsure if it was covered (29%). Among women who did not use insurance for their abortion, 52% found it difficult to pay for the procedure. One half of patients relied on someone else to help cover costs, most commonly the man involved in the pregnancy. Most women incurred ancillary expenses in the form of transportation (mean, $44), and a minority also reported lost wages (mean, $198), childcare expenses (mean, $57) and other travel-related costs (mean, $140). Substantial minorities also delayed or did not pay bills such as rent (14%), food (16%), or utilities and other bills (30%) to pay for the abortion.ConclusionsPublic and private health insurance plan coverage of abortion care services could ease the financial strain experienced by abortion patients, many of whom are low income.     

Creating a priority list of non-communicable diseases to support health research funding decision-making

ObjectiveTo develop and pilot a framework based on multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to prioritize non-communicable diseases (NCDs) to support health research funding decision-making.MethodsThe framework involves identifying NCDs to be prioritized, specifying prioritization criteria and determining their weights from a survey of stakeholders. The mean weights from the survey are applied to the NCDs’ ratings on the criteria to generate a ‘total score’ for each NCD, by which the NCDs are prioritized.ResultsNineteen NCDs and five criteria were included. The criteria, in decreasing order of importance (mean weights in parentheses), are: deaths across the population (27.7 %), loss of quality-of-life across the population (23.0 %), cost to patients and families (18.6 %), cost to the health system (17.2 %), and whether vulnerable groups are disproportionately affected (13.4 %). The priority list of NCDs, stratified into four tiers of importance, is: ‘Very critical’ priority: coronary heart disease, back and neck pain, diabetes mellitus; ‘Critical’ priority: dementia and Alzheimer’s disease, stroke; ‘High’ priority: colon and rectum cancer, depressive disorders, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, breast cancer, prostate cancer, arthritis, lung cancer; and ‘Medium’ priority: asthma, hearing loss, melanoma skin cancer, addictive disorders, non-melanoma skin cancer, headaches.ConclusionThe results indicate the framework for prioritizing NCDs for research funding is feasible and effective. The framework could also be used for other health conditions.     

Barriers to accessing benefits in a community-based insurance scheme: lessons learnt from SEWA Insurance, Gujarat

This paper seeks to examine barriers faced by members of a community-based insurance (CBI) scheme, which is targeted at poor women and their families, in accessing scheme benefits. CBI schemes have been developed and promoted as mechanisms to offer protection to poor families from the risks of ill-health, death and loss of assets. However, having voluntarily enrolled in a CBI scheme, poor households may find it difficult or impossible to access scheme benefits. The paper describes the results of qualitative research carried out to assess the barriers faced in accessing scheme benefits by members of the CBI scheme run by the Self-Employed Women's Association (SEWA) in Gujarat, India. The study finds that the members face a variety of different barriers, particularly in seeking hospitalization and in submitting insurance claims. Some of the barriers are rooted in factors outside the scheme's control, such as illiteracy and financial poverty amongst members, and inadequacies of the transportation and health care infrastructure. But other barriers relate to the scheme's design and management, for example, lack of clarity among scheme staff regarding the scheme's rules and processes, and requirements that claimants submit documents to prove the validity of their claims. The paper makes recommendations as to how SEWA Insurance can address some of the identified barriers and discusses the relevance of these findings to other CBI schemes in India and elsewhere.     

¿Qué revela sobre el sistema público sanitario la contratación de un seguro de salud privado?

ObjectiveThis study examines individuals’ choice of private health insurance in Spain. Private health insurance choices reveal the attributes of health care most highly valued by the population, and the perceived responsiveness of the public system in delivering those preferences.MethodThe paper exploits the 2004, 2009 and 2014 waves of the national Health Barometer survey, examining the health insurance choice separately for the general population and a small but influential sector of elite public-sector employees who can opt out from the public health system (civil servants).ResultsPublic healthcare is a highly regarded provider in terms of technology and doctor training, even by those who chose private health insurance, but falls short in terms of amenities such as comfort and speed of attendance. These findings confirm well-known strengths and criticisms of the public system. However, the study also finds that citizens are concerned about the performance of the public sector in key domains of health system responsiveness, such as personal contact and information and these concerns also influence their decision to opt for private provision. Finally, civil servants, even the minority who opted for public provision, tend to have a lower opinion of the public health service than non-civil servants, especially in terms of personal contact, information, primary care and specialist care.ConclusionsThese perceptions and concerns of the public about the performance of the public health service will be of interest for policy makers and should be investigated further.