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:Approximately 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.We 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).Of 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.Evidence 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: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.

Project description:Background: Dependence is a significant health-related condition for older adults (OA) and implies that self-care is transferred to other people, the community or institutions. Recent studies have analyzed the relationship between out-of-pocket (OOP) healthcare expenditures and dependence. Nonetheless, these studies were not specifically designed to estimate the economic impact of dependence. Our aim was to estimate the total adjusted annual OOP healthcare expenditures in dependent older adults compared to independent ones. Additionally, we explore the potential combined effect of basic activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) dependence on OOP healthcare expenditures. Methods: Data comes from the cross-sectional study "Economic impact of physical dependence in older adults and the burden of informal care" conducted in 2018 with a sample of 735 community-dwelling older Mexican adults ages 60 and older. We used direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect costs to estimate the OOP healthcare expenditures associated with dependence. We applied the Katz scale to assess dependence in ADL and the Lawton scale to assess dependence in IADL. Two-Part regression models were used to analyze the relationship between dependence and OOP health expenditures. Results: Presence of ADL dependence represented a higher level of expenditure, 107% compared to non-dependent OA (? = 1.07, CI95%: 0.43-1.71), and 97% for IADL dependence (? = 0.97, CI95%: 0.49-1.45). The combined effect of ADL and IADL dependence (132%) was greater (? = 1.32, CI95%: 0.74-1.90) than the effect of ADL or IADL dependence alone. In monetary terms, OA with ADL dependence had a total annualized mean OOP healthcare expenditure of $31,865 (Mexican pesos), OA with IADL $26,912, and combined ADL and IADL $39,520. Conclusions: ADL and IADL dependence are associated with the total annualized OOP healthcare expenditures. This association is even higher when both conditions are present together. These findings highlight the economic implications of the dependence for individuals, their families, and the health system. Given that current evidence on effective interventions to prevent dependence in OA is insufficient, future studies should be conducted to estimate their costs and determine what interventions work, as well as their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in different sub-groups of the population, and how these might be appropriately implemented.