Dataset Information

Trends in Total and Out-of-Pocket Expenditures for Visits to Primary Care Physicians, by Insurance Type, 2002-2017.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Total and out-of-pocket visit expenditures for primary care physician visits may affect how primary care is delivered. We determined trends in these expenditures for visits to US primary care physicians.

Methods

Using the 2002-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we ascertained changes in total and out-of-pocket visit expenditures for primary care visits for Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. We calculated mean values for each insurer using a generalized linear model and a 2-part model, respectively.

Results

Analyses were based on 750,837 primary care visits during 2002-2017. Over time, the proportion of primary care visits associated with private insurance or no insurance decreased, while Medicare- or Medicaid-associated visits increased. The proportion of visits with $0 out-of-pocket expenditure increased, primarily from an increase in $0 private insurance visits. Total expenditure per visit increased for private insurance and Medicare visits, but did not notably change for Medicaid visits. Out-of-pocket expenditures rose primarily from increases in private insurance visits with higher expenditures of this type. Medicare and Medicaid had minimal change in out-of-pocket expenditure per visit.

Conclusions

Between 2002 and 2017, mean total expenditures and out-of-pocket expenditures increased for primary care visits, but at notably lower rates than those previously documented for emergency department visits. A rise in total expenditure per visit was identified for private insurance and Medicare, but not for Medicaid. Out-of-pocket expenditures increased marginally related to changes in out-of-pocket expenditures for private insurance visits. We would expect increasing difficulty with primary care physician access, particularly for Medicaid patients, if the current trends continue.

SUBMITTER: Johansen ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7489978 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundApproximately 150 million people suffer from financial catastrophe annually because of out-of-pocket expenditures (OOPEs) on health. Although the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) of Ghana was designed to promote universal health coverage, OOPEs as a proportion of total health expenditures remains elevated at 26%, exceeding the WHO's recommendations of less than 15-20%. To determine whether enrollment in the NHIS reduces the likelihood of OOPEs and catastrophic health expenditures (CHEs) in Ghana, we undertook a systematic review of the published literature.MethodsWe searched for quantitative articles published in English between January 1, 2003 and August 22, 2017 in PubMed, Google Scholar, Economic Literature, Global Health, PAIS International, and African Index Medicus. Two independent authors (J.S.O. & S.E.) reviewed the articles for inclusion, extracted the data, and conducted a quality assessment of the studies. We accepted the World Health Organization definition of catastrophic health expenditures which is out of pocket payments for health care which exceeds 20% of annual house hold income, 10% of household expenditures, or 40% of subsistence expenditures (total household expenditures net food expenditures).ResultsOf the 1094 articles initially identified, 7 were eligible for inclusion. These were cross-sectional household studies published between 2008 and 2016 in Ghana. They demonstrated that the uninsured paid 1.4 to 10 times more in out-of-pocket payments (OOPs) and were more likely to incur CHEs than the insured. Yet, 6 to 18% of insured households made catastrophic payments for healthcare and all studies reported insured members making OOPs for medicines.ConclusionEvidence suggests that the national health insurance scheme of Ghana over the last 14 years has made some impact on reducing OOPEs, and yet healthcare costs remain catastrophic for a large proportion of insured households in Ghana. Future studies need to explore reasons for the persistence of OOPs for medicines and services that are covered under the scheme.

Project description:Objectives This study aims to assess the impact of the subsidised community health insurance scheme in Senegal particularly on the poor. Design and setting The study used data from a household survey conducted in 2019 in three regions, representing 29.3% of the total population. Inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was applied for the analysis. Participants 1766 households with 15 584 individuals selected through a stratified random sampling with two draws. Main outcome measures The impact of community-based health insurance (CBHI) was evaluated on poor people’s access to care and on their financial protection. For the measurement of access to care, we were interested in the use of health services and non-withdrawal from care in case of illness. To assess financial protection, we looked at out-of-pocket expenditure by type of provider and by type of service, the weight of out-of-pocket expenditure on household income, non-exposure to impoverishing health expenditure and non-exposure to catastrophic health expenditure. Results The results indicate that the CBHI increases primary healthcare utilisation for non-poor (OR 1.36 (CI90 1.02–1.8) for the general scheme and 1.37 (CI90 1.06–1.77) for the special scheme for indigent recipients of social cash transfers), protect them against catastrophic (OR 1.63 (CI90 1.12–2.39)) or impoverishing (OR 2.4 (CI90 1.27–4.5)) health expenditures. However, CBHI has no impact on the poor’s healthcare utilisation (OR 0.61 (CI90 0.4–0.94)) and do not protect them from the burden related to healthcare expenditures (OR: 0.27 (CI90 0.13–0.54)). Conclusion Our study found that CBHI has an impact on the non-poor but does not sufficiently protect the poor. This leads us to conclude that a health insurance programme designed for the general population may not be appropriate for the poor. A qualitative study should be conducted to better understand the non-financial barriers to accessing care that may disproportionately affect the poorest.

Project description:PURPOSE:High-deductible health plan (HDHP) enrollment is expanding rapidly and might substantially increase out-of-pocket (OOP) payment burden. We examined trends in total and OOP health service expenditures overall and by insurance coverage type among women with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS:We used a longitudinal time series design to examine measures among 5364 women with metastatic breast cancer insured by a large US health insurer from 2004 to 2011. We measured outcomes during the 12 months after a first identified metastatic breast cancer diagnosis and required women to have at least 6 months of prior enrollment. We plotted enrollment measures and adjusted total and OOP spending. We fit trend lines using linear autoregressive models. RESULTS:Between 2004 and 2011, the percentage of women with metastatic breast cancer enrolled in employer-mandated HDHPs increased from 8 to 23% while the percentage enrolled in employer-mandated low-deductible plans (LDHPs) decreased from 69 to 37%. Over the same time period, estimated annual inflation-adjusted total health service spending among women with metastatic breast cancer whose employers only offered HDHPs or LDHPS increased from $96,899 to $104,688 (increase of $1197 per year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: $47,$2,348). Corresponding OOP spending values among these women with employer-mandated deductible levels were $4,496 and $5,151 ($91 per year trend; 95% CI -$13,$195). From 2004-2011, women in HDHPs and LDHPs had unchanged annual OOP spending, estimated at of $6642 (95% CI $6,268,$7016) and $4,247 (95% CI $3956,$4538), respectively. Thus, women in HDHPs experienced 55% (44%, 66%) more OOP spending than women in LDHP. CONCLUSIONS:OOP spending among women with metastatic breast cancer and employer-mandated deductible levels was 55% higher among HDHP than LDHP members, and employer-mandated HDHP enrollment increased substantially from 2004 to 2011. Stakeholders and policymakers should design health plans that protect financially vulnerable cancer patients from high OOP costs.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Aligned with the international call for universal coverage of affordable and quality health care, the government of Tajikistan is undertaking reforms of its health system aiming amongst others at reducing the out-of-pocket expenditures (OPE) of patients seeking care. Household surveys were conducted in 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2011 to explore the scale and determinants of OPE of users in four district of Tajikistan, where health care is legally free of charge at the primary level. METHODS: Using the data from four cross-sectional household surveys conducted between 2005 and 2011, time trends in OPE for consultation fees, drugs and transport costs of adult users of family medicine services were analysed. To investigate differences along the economic status, an asset index was constructed using principal component analysis. RESULTS: Adjusted for inflation, OPE for primary care have substantially increased in the period 2005 to 2011. While the proportion of patients reporting the payment of informal consultation fees to providers and their amount were constant over time, the proportion of patients reporting expenditures for drugs has increased, and the median amounts have doubled from 5.3 US$ to 10.7 US$. Thus, the expenditures on medicine represent the biggest financial burden for patients accessing a primary care facility. Regression models showed that in 2011 patients from the most remote district with spread-out villages reported significant higher expenditures on medicine. Besides the steady increase in the median amount for OPE, the proportion of patients reporting making an informal payment to their care provider showed great variations across district of residence (between 20% and 73%) and economic status (between 33% among the 'worst-off' group and 68% among the 'better-off' group). CONCLUSIONS: In a context of limited governmental funds allocated to health and financing reforms aiming to improve financial access to primary care, the present paper indicates that in Tajikistan OPE - especially in relation to expenditures for drugs - have increased over time, and vary substantially across geographical areas and economic status. The fact that better-off households report disbursing more and in higher proportions hints towards a discrimination along the capacity to pay from providers. Increased public investments in the health sector, incentives for family doctors to provide PHC services free of charge and a strengthened drug control and supply system are necessary strategies to improve access of patients to services.