'Health Benefits Package': a centerpiece of Universal Health Coverage

Abstract Background Thailand, an upper-middle income country, has demonstrated exemplary outcomes of Universal Health Coverage (UHC). The country achieved full population coverage and a high level of financial risk protection since 2002, through implementing three public health insurance schemes. UHC has two explicit goals of improved access to health services and financial protection where use of these services does not create financial hardship. Prior studies in Thailand do not provide evidence of long-term UHC financial risk protection. This study assessed financial risk protection as measured by the incidence of catastrophic health spending and impoverishment in Thai households prior to and after UHC in 2002. Methods We used data from a 15-year series of annual national household socioeconomic surveys (SES) between 1996 and 2015, which were conducted by the National Statistic Office (NSO). The survey covered about 52,000 nationally representative households in each round. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the incidence of catastrophic payment as measured by the share of out-of-pocket payment (OOP) for health by households exceeding 10 and 25% of household total consumption expenditure, and the incidence of impoverishment as determined by the additional number of non-poor households falling below the national and international poverty lines after making health payments. Results Using the 10% threshold, the incidence of catastrophic spending dropped from 6.0% in 1996 to 2% in 2015. This incidence reduced more significantly when the 25% threshold was applied from 1.8 to 0.4% during the same period. The incidence of impoverishment against the national poverty line reduced considerably from 2.2% in 1996 to approximately 0.3% in 2015. When the international poverty line of US$ 3.1 per capita per day was applied, the incidence of impoverishment was 1.4 and 0.4% in 1996 and 2015 respectively; and when US$ 1.9 per day was applied, the incidence was negligibly low. Conclusion The significant decline in the incidence of catastrophic health spending and impoverishment was attributed to the deliberate design of Thailand’s UHC, which provides a comprehensive benefits package and zero co-payment at point of services. The well-founded healthcare delivery system and favourable benefits package concertedly support the achievement of UHC goals of access and financial risk protection.

Download Full-text

Exploring willingness to pay for health insurance and preferences for a benefits package from the perspective of women from low-income households of Karachi, Pakistan

BMC Health Services Research ◽

10.1186/s12913-021-06403-6 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Shifa Salman Habib ◽

Shehla Zaidi

Keyword(s):

Health Insurance ◽

Universal Health Coverage ◽

Low Income ◽

Diagnostic Tests ◽

Health Coverage ◽

Insurance Scheme ◽

Insurance Benefits ◽

Universal Health ◽

Benefits Package ◽

Low Income Households

Abstract Background Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) and reduction in out of pocket (OOP) expenditures on health, is a critical target of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). In low-middle income countries, micro-health insurance (MHI) schemes have emerged as a useful financing tool for laying grounds for Universal Health Coverage. The aim of this study was to provide evidence for designing a feasible health insurance scheme targeted at urban poor, by exploring preferences for an insurance benefits package and co-payments among women from low-income households in Karachi, Pakistan. Methods This was a descriptive cross-sectional study, conducted using household surveys between July–August 2015. A total of 167 female beneficiaries of Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP), a large-scale cash transfer scheme targeted at low-income households, were recruited in Karachi through a mix of convenience and snowball sampling. Hypothetical insurance benefits packages for a prospective health insurance scheme were formulated to capture respondents’ preferences for health insurance benefits package and co-payments. All data was analyzed using Stata (version 13). Results Respondents reporting expenditure on OPD and hospitalization in the last 2 weeks were 93.4 and 11.9% respectively. The highest median expenditure was incurred on medicines. Out of the proposed benefits package, a majority (53%) of the study participants opted for the comprehensive benefits package that provided coverage for emergency care, hospitalization, OPD consultation, diagnostic tests and transportation. For the co-payment plan, 38.9% participants preferred no co-payments that is 100% insurance coverage of medicines followed by hospitalization (25.9%). Nearly half of the respondents (49.4%) chose outpatient consultation for 50% co-payment. A majority of the participants (65.3%) agreed to 100% co-payment for the transportation cost. Conclusion Health insurance schemes can be introduced in urban areas, against collection of micro-payments, to prevent low-income households from facing financial catastrophe. A comprehensive benefits package covering emergency care, hospitalization, OPD consultation, diagnostic tests and transportation, is the most preferred among low-income beneficiaries.

Download Full-text

Newborn health benefits or financial risk protection? An ethical analysis of a real-life dilemma in a setting without universal health coverage

Journal of Medical Ethics ◽

10.1136/medethics-2017-104438 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 44 (8) ◽

pp. 524-530 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kristine Husøy Onarheim ◽

Ole Frithjof Norheim ◽

Ingrid Miljeteig

Keyword(s):

Universal Health Coverage ◽

Financial Risk ◽

Health Workers ◽

Health Benefits ◽

Real Life ◽

Ethical Analysis ◽

Health Coverage ◽

Financial Risk Protection ◽

Risk Protection ◽

Universal Health

IntroductionHigh healthcare costs make illness precarious for both patients and their families’ economic situation. Despite the recent focus on the interconnection between health and financial risk at the systemic level, the ethical conflict between concerns for potential health benefits and financial risk protection at the household level in a low-income setting is less understood.MethodsUsing a seven-step ethical analysis, we examine a real-life dilemma faced by families and health workers at the micro level in Ethiopia and analyse the acceptability of limiting treatment for an ill newborn to protect against financial risk. We assess available evidence and ethical issues at stake and discuss the dilemma with respect to three priority setting criteria: health maximisation, priority to the worse-off and financial risk protection.ResultsGiving priority to health maximisation and extra priority to the worse-off suggests, in this particular case, that limiting treatment is not acceptable even if the total well-being gain from reduced financial risk is taken into account. Our conclusion depends on the facts of the case and the relative weight assigned to these criteria. However, there are problematic aspects with the premise of this dilemma. The most affected parties—the newborn, family members and health worker—cannot make free choices about whether to limit treatment or not, and we thereby accept deprivations of people’s substantive freedoms.ConclusionIn settings where healthcare is financed largely out-of-pocket, families and health workers face tragic trade-offs. As countries move towards universal health coverage, financial risk protection for high-priority services is necessary to promote fairness, improve health and reduce poverty.

Download Full-text

Using allocative efficiency analysis to inform health benefits package design for progressing towards Universal Health Coverage: Proof-of-concept studies in countries seeking decision support

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0260247 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (11) ◽

pp. e0260247

Author(s):

Nicole Fraser-Hurt ◽

Xiaohui Hou ◽

Thomas Wilkinson ◽

Denizhan Duran ◽

Gerard J. Abou Jaoude ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cote D'ivoire ◽

Universal Health Coverage ◽

Côte D’Ivoire ◽

Allocative Efficiency ◽

Health Benefits ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Efficiency Analysis ◽

Health Coverage ◽

Effective Interventions ◽

Universal Health

Background Countries are increasingly defining health benefits packages (HBPs) as a way of progressing towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC). Resources for health are commonly constrained, so it is imperative to allocate funds as efficiently as possible. We conducted allocative efficiency analyses using the Health Interventions Prioritization tool (HIPtool) to estimate the cost and impact of potential HBPs in three countries. These analyses explore the usefulness of allocative efficiency analysis and HIPtool in particular, in contributing to priority setting discussions. Methods and findings HIPtool is an open-access and open-source allocative efficiency modelling tool. It is preloaded with publicly available data, including data on the 218 cost-effective interventions comprising the Essential UHC package identified in the 3rd Edition of Disease Control Priorities, and global burden of disease data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. For these analyses, the data were adapted to the health systems of Armenia, Côte d’Ivoire and Zimbabwe. Local data replaced global data where possible. Optimized resource allocations were then estimated using the optimization algorithm. In Armenia, optimized spending on UHC interventions could avert 26% more disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), but even highly cost-effective interventions are not funded without an increase in the current health budget. In Côte d’Ivoire, surgical interventions, maternal and child health and health promotion interventions are scaled up under optimized spending with an estimated 22% increase in DALYs averted–mostly at the primary care level. In Zimbabwe, the estimated gain was even higher at 49% of additional DALYs averted through optimized spending. Conclusions HIPtool applications can assist discussions around spending prioritization, HBP design and primary health care transformation. The analyses provided actionable policy recommendations regarding spending allocations across specific delivery platforms, disease programs and interventions. Resource constraints exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic increase the need for formal planning of resource allocation to maximize health benefits.

Download Full-text