Strategies for reducing out of pocket payments in the health system: a scoping review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Direct out-of-pocket payments (OOP) are among the most important financing mechanisms in many health systems, especially in developing countries, adversely affecting equality and leading vulnerable groups to poverty. Therefore, this scoping review study was conducted to identify the strategies involving OOP reduction in health systems.

Methods

Articles published in English on strategies related to out-of-pocket payments were Searched and retrieved in the Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Embase databases between January 2000 and November 2020, following PRISMA guidelines. As a result, 3710 papers were retrieved initially, and 40 were selected for full-text assessment.

Results

Out of 40 papers included, 22 (55%) and 18 (45%) of the study were conducted in developing and developed countries, respectively. The strategies were divided into four categories based on health system functions: health system stewardship, creating resources, health financing mechanisms, and delivering health services.As well, developing and developed countries applied different types of strategies to reduce OOP.

Conclusion

The present review identified some strategies that affect the OOP payments According to the health system functions framework. Considering the importance of stewardship, creating resources, the health financing mechanisms, and delivering health services in reducing OOP, this study could help policymakers make better decisions for reducing OOP expenditures.

Related collections

Most cited references 50

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Cost-of-illness analysis. What room in health economics?

Rosanna Tarricone (2006)

Cost-of-illness (COI) was the first economic evaluation technique used in the health field. The principal aim was to measure the economic burden of illness to society. Its usefulness as a decision-making tool has however been questioned since its inception. The main criticism came from welfare economists who rejected COIs because they were not grounded in welfare economics theory. Other attacks related to the use of the human capital approach (HCA) to evaluate morbidity and mortality costs since it was said that the HCA had nothing to do with the value people attach to their lives. Finally, objections were made that COI could not be of any help to decision makers and that other forms of economic evaluation (e.g. cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit analysis) would be much more useful to those taking decisions and ranking priorities. Conversely, it is here suggested that COI can be a good economic tool to inform decision makers if it is considered from another perspective. COI is a descriptive study that can provide information to support the political process as well as the management functions at different levels of the healthcare organisations. To do that, the design of the study must be innovative, capable of measuring the true cost to society; to estimate the main cost components and their incidence over total costs; to envisage the different subjects who bear the costs; to identify the actual clinical management of illness; and to explain cost variability. In order to reach these goals, COI need to be designed as observational bottom-up studies.

0 comments Cited 166 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Disease-specific out-of-pocket and catastrophic health expenditure on hospitalization in India: Do Indian households face distress health financing?

Anshul Kastor, Sanjay K. Mohanty (2018)

Background Rising non-communicable diseases (NCDs) coupled with increasing injuries have resulted in a significant increase in health spending in India. While out-of-pocket expenditure remains the major source of health care financing in India (two-thirds of the total health spending), the financial burden varies enormously across diseases and by the economic well-being of the households. Though prior studies have examined the variation in disease pattern, little is known about the financial risk to the families by type of diseases in India. In this context, the present study examines disease-specific out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE), catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and distress health financing. Methods and materials Unit data from the 71st round of the National Sample Survey Organization (2014) was used for this study. OOPE is defined as health spending on hospitalization net of reimbursement, and CHE is defined as household health spending exceeding 10% of household consumption expenditure. Distress health financing is defined as a situation when a household has to borrow money or sell their property/assets or when it gets contributions from friends/relatives to meet its health care expenses. OOPE was estimated for 16 selected diseases and across three broad categories- communicable diseases, NCDs and injuries. Multivariate logistic regression was used to understand the determinants of distress financing and CHE. Results Mean OOPE on hospitalization was INR 19,210 and was the highest for cancer (INR 57,232) followed by heart diseases (INR 40,947). About 28% of the households incurred CHE and faced distress financing. Among all the diseases, cancer caused the highest CHE (79%) and distress financing (43%). More than one-third of the inpatients reported distressed financing for heart diseases, neurological disorders, genito urinary problems, musculoskeletal diseases, gastro-intestinal problems and injuries. The likelihood of incurring distress financing was 3.2 times higher for those hospitalized for cancer (OR 3.23; 95% CI: 2.62–3.99) and 2.6 times for tuberculosis patients (OR 2.61; 95% CI: 2.06–3.31). A large proportion of households who had reported distress financing also incurred CHE. Recommendations Free treatment for cancer and heart diseases is recommended for the vulnerable sections of the society. Risk-pooling and social security mechanisms based on contributions from both households as well as the central and state governments can reduce the financial burden of diseases and avert households from distress health financing.

0 comments Cited 90 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Health-Related Financial Catastrophe, Inequality and Chronic Illness in Bangladesh

Md Mizanur Rahman, Stuart Gilmour, Eiko Saito … (2013)

Background Bangladesh has a high proportion of households incurring catastrophic health expenditure, and very limited risk sharing mechanisms. Identifying determinants of out-of-pocket (OOP) payments and catastrophic health expenditure may reveal opportunities to reduce costs and protect households from financial risk. Objective This study investigates the determinants of high healthcare expenditure and healthcare- related financial catastrophe. Methods A cross-sectional household survey was conducted in Rajshahi city, Bangladesh, in 2011. Catastrophic health expenditure was estimated separately based on capacity to pay and proportion of non-food expenditure. Determinants of OOP payments and financial catastrophe were estimated using double hurdle and Poisson regression models respectively. Results On average households spent 11% of their total budgets on health, half the residents spent 7% of the monthly per capita consumption expenditure for one illness, and nearly 9% of households faced financial catastrophe. The poorest households spent less on health but had a four times higher risk of catastrophe than the richest households. The risk of financial catastrophe and the level of OOP payments were higher for users of inpatient, outpatient public and private facilities respectively compared to using self-medication or traditional healers. Other determinants of OOP payments and catastrophic expenses were economic status, presence of chronic illness in the household, and illness among children and adults. Conclusion Households that received inpatient or outpatient private care experienced the highest burden of health expenditure. The poorest members of the community also face large, often catastrophic expenses. Chronic illness management is crucial to reducing the total burden of disease in a household and its associated increased risk of level of OOP payments and catastrophic expenses. Households can only be protected from these situations by reducing the health system's dependency on OOP payments and providing more financial risk protection.

0 comments Cited 60 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Sajad Delavari:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5539-9026

sajadd@gmail.com

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Cost Eff Resour Alloc

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Cost Eff Resour Alloc

Title: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation : C/E

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1478-7547

Publication date (Electronic): 4 August 2021

Publication date PMC-release: 4 August 2021

Publication date Collection: 2021

Volume: 19

Electronic Location Identifier: 47

Affiliations

[1 ]GRID grid.412571.4, ISNI 0000 0000 8819 4698, Student Research Committee, , Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, ; Shiraz, Iran

[2 ]GRID grid.412571.4, ISNI 0000 0000 8819 4698, Health Human Resources Research Center, , School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, ; Shiraz, Iran

Author information

Sajad Delavari http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5539-9026

Article

Publisher ID: 301

DOI: 10.1186/s12962-021-00301-8

PMC ID: 8336090

PubMed ID: 34348717

SO-VID: 0a3d71a7-589a-4b50-9676-9aca8acf6fa9

License:

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

History

Date received : 6 June 2021

Date accepted : 28 July 2021

Funding

Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013041, Vice-Chancellor for Research, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences;

Award ID: 23113

Award Recipient : Sajad Delavari

Custom metadata

ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health

Keywords: oop,out of pocket,health policy,health system,financing,scoping review

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health

Keywords: oop, out of pocket, health policy, health system, financing, scoping review

Strategies for reducing out of pocket payments in the health system: a scoping review

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Related collections

Climate Change and Human Health

Most cited references 50

Cost-of-illness analysis. What room in health economics?

Disease-specific out-of-pocket and catastrophic health expenditure on hospitalization in India: Do Indian households face distress health financing?

Health-Related Financial Catastrophe, Inequality and Chronic Illness in Bangladesh

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 365

Cited by 8

Most referenced authors 1,749