Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on Removing Adult Tonsillectomy and Septoplasty from the Government Health Insurance Plan in a Publicly Funded Health Care System.

ABSTRACT: In several publicly funded health care systems, including Ontario, Canada, adult tonsillectomies and septoplasties have been suggested to be removed or "delisted" from the government health insurance plan. Thus, the objective of this study was to explore patient perspectives regarding out of pocket (OOP) payment for these procedures. An anonymous survey was administered to patients consented to undergo a tonsillectomy or septoplasty at a community otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) practice. The survey asked patients if they would pay the projected cost for their surgery OOP and the maximum amount of time they would wait for their surgery. The survey also contained questions on socioeconomic status and disease severity. Seventy-one patients were included. Overall, 21% of patients were willing to pay OOP for their surgery. Forty-nine percent of patients reported that the maximum amount of time they would be willing to wait for their surgery was 2 to 6 months. There was no significant correlation found between any of the demographic variables or disease severity and willingness to pay OOP for these surgeries. In this study, a small percentage of patients who met the clinical indications for a tonsillectomy or a septoplasty would pay for their surgery in the event that it was not covered by the government health insurance plan. These surgeries are common operations and delisting them could potentially decrease the provision of these services and have a significant impact on Canadian OHNS practices.

SUBMITTER: Grose E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8058792 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many LMICs have implemented Publicly Funded Health Insurance (PFHI) programmes to improve access and financial protection. The national PFHI scheme implemented in India for a decade has been recently modified and expanded to cover free hospital care for 500 million persons. Since increase in annual cover amount is one of the main design modifications in the new programme, the relevant policy question is whether such design change can improve financial protection for hospital care. An evaluation of state-specific PFHI programmes with vertical cover larger than RSBY can help answer this question. Three states in Southern India - Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have been pioneers in implementing PFHI with a large insurance cover. METHODS:The current study was meant to evaluate the PFHI in above three states in improving utilisation of hospital services and financial protection against expenses of hospitalization. Two cross-sections from National Sample Survey's health rounds, the 60th round done in 2004 and the 71st round done in 2014 were analysed. Instrumental Variable method was applied to address endogeneity or the selection problem in insurance. RESULTS:Enrollment under PFHI was not associated with increase in utilisation of hospital care in the three states. Private hospitals dominated the empanelment of facilities under PFHI as well as utilisation. Out of Pocket Expenditure and incidence of Catastrophic Health Expenditure did not decrease with enrollment under PFHI in the three states. The size of Out of Pocket Expenditure was significantly greater for utilisation in private sector, irrespective of insurance enrollment. CONCLUSION:PFHI in the three states used substantially larger vertical cover than national scheme in 2014. The three states are known for their good governance. Yet, the PFHI programmes in all three states failed in fulfilling their fundamental purpose. Increasing vertical cover of PFHI and using either 'Trusts' or Insurance-companies as purchasers may not give desired results in absence of adequate regulation. The study raises doubts regarding effectiveness of contracting under PFHIs to influence provider-behavior in the Indian context. Further research is required to find solutions for addressing gaps that contribute to poor financial outcomes for patients under PFHI.

Project description:BackgroundThe continuing impetus for universal health coverage has given rise to publicly funded health insurance schemes in lower-middle income countries. However, there is insufficient understanding of how universal health coverage schemes impact gender equality and equity. This paper attempts to understand why utilization of a publicly funded health insurance scheme has been found to be lower among women compared to men in a southern Indian state. It aims to identify the gender barriers across various social institutions that thwart the policy objectives of providing financial protection and improved access to inpatient care for women.MethodsA qualitative study on the Chief Minister's Comprehensive Health Insurance Scheme was carried out in urban and rural impoverished localities in Tamil Nadu, a southern state in India. Thirty-three women and 16 men who had a recent history of hospitalization and 14 stakeholders were purposefully interviewed. Transcribed interviews were content analyzed based on Naila Kabeer's Social Relations Framework using gender as an analytical category.ResultsWhile unpacking the navigation pathways of women to utilize publicly funded health insurance to access inpatient care, gender barriers are found operating at the household, community, and programmatic levels. Unpaid care work, financial dependence, mobility constraints, and gender norms emerged as the major gender-specific barriers arising from the household. Exclusions from insurance enrollment activities at the community level were mediated by a variety of social inequities. Market ideologies in insurance and health, combined with poor governance by State, resulted in out-of-pocket health expenditures, acute information asymmetry, selective availability of care, and poor acceptability. These gender barriers were found to be mediated by all four institutions-household, community, market, and State-resulting in lower utilization of the scheme by women.ConclusionsHealth policies which aim to provide financial protection and improve access to healthcare services need to address gender as a crucial social determinant. A gender-blind health insurance can not only leave many pre-existing gender barriers unaddressed but also accentuate others. This paper stresses that universal health coverage policy and programs need to have an explicit focus on gender and other social determinants to promote access and equity.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate impacts of a residency-based waiting period for health insurance coverage on lived experiences of health and settlement for im/migrant women in British Columbia, Canada.DesignThe IRIS study is a mixed-methods, community-based, qualitative evaluation of recently arrived im/migrant women's access to sexual and reproductive care. In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted by trained multilingual and multicultural interviewers with lived migration experience in the participant's preferred language.SettingMetro Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada from July 2018 to January 2020.ParticipantsData collected from community focus groups (four groups, n=29) of both service providers and im/migrant women was used. Following this, qualitative interviews with service providers (n=10) and im/migrant women (n=47) were conducted. Eligible participants self-identified as women; were aged 18-49 and had arrived in Canada from another country. Eligible providers were employed in the health, social or legal sectors working with im/migrant women.ResultsThe wait period resulted in mistrust and internalised stigma for racialised im/migrant women, for whom the policy resulted in feeling 'undeserving' of care. Resulting administrative burden produced delays and unmet need for care, particularly related to sexual and reproductive healthcare and children's health. Unexpected costs meant difficult choices between survival and care. Negative health outcomes included the inability to family plan, difficulties during pregnancy, as well as hardships related not being able to seek help for sick children. Community-based organisations provided support in many areas but could not fill all gaps produced by this policy.ConclusionsFindings highlight severe, yet commonly overlooked, health inequities produced by a mandatory health coverage wait period within a purportedly 'universal' healthcare system. Health system policies such as mandatory 'waiting periods' produce discriminatory and inequitable outcomes for im/migrant women. Policy reforms towards full 'healthcare for all' are urgently needed to affirm the health and human rights of all im/migrants.

Project description:BackgroundGovernment-sponsored health insurance schemes (GSHIS) aim to improve access to and utilization of healthcare services and offer financial protection to the population. India's Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY) is one such GSHIS. This paper aims to understand how the processes put in place to manage hospital-based transactions, from the time a beneficiary arrives at the hospital to discharge are being implemented in PM-JAY and how to improve them to strengthen the scheme's operation.MethodsGuidelines were reviewed for the processes associated with hospital-based transactions, namely, beneficiary authentication, treatment package selection, preauthorization, discharge, and claims payments. Across 14 hospitals in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh states, the above-mentioned processes were observed, and using a semi-structured interview guide fifty-three respondents were interviewed. The study was carried out from March 2019 to August 2019.ResultsAverage turn-around time for claim reimbursement is two to six times higher than that proposed in guidelines and tender. As opposed to the guidelines, beneficiaries are incurring out-of-pocket expenditure while availing healthcare services. The training provided to the front-line workers is software-centric. Hospital-based processes are relatively more efficient in hospitals where frontline workers have a medical/paramedical/managerial background.ConclusionsThere is a need to broaden capacity-building efforts from enabling frontline staff to operate the scheme's IT platform to developing the technical, managerial, and leadership skills required for them. At the hospital level, an empowered frontline worker is the key to efficient hospital-based processes. There is a need to streamline back-end processes to eliminate the causes for delay in the processing of claim payment requests. For policymakers, the most important and urgent need is to reduce out-of-pocket expenses. To that end, there is a need to both revisit and streamline the existing guidelines and ensure adherence to the guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundThe Health and Health Services Research Fund (HHSRF) is dedicated to support research related to all aspects of health and health services in Hong Kong. We evaluated the fund's outcomes and explored factors associated with the translation of research findings to changes in health policy and provider behaviour.MethodsA locally suitable questionnaire was developed based on the "payback" evaluation framework and was sent to principal investigators of the completed research projects supported by the fund since 1993. Research "payback" in six outcome areas was surveyed, namely knowledge production, use of research in the research system, use of research project findings in health system policy/decision making, application of the research findings through changed behaviour, factors influencing the utilization of research, and health/health service/economic benefits.ResultsPrincipal investigators of 178 of 205 (87%) completed research projects returned the questionnaire. Investigators reported research publications in 86.5% (mean = 5.4 publications per project), career advancement 34.3%, acquisition of higher qualifications 38.2%, use of results in policy making 35.4%, changed behaviour in light of findings 49.4%, evidence of health service benefit 42.1% and generated subsequent research in 44.9% of the projects. Payback outcomes were positively associated with the amount of funding awarded. Multivariate analysis found participation of investigators in policy committees and liaison with potential users were significantly associated with reported health service benefit (odds ratio [OR]participation = 2.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-6.40; ORliaison = 2.03, 95% CI 1.05-3.91), policy and decision-making (ORparticipation = 10.53, 95% CI 4.13-26.81; ORliaison = 2.52, 95% CI 1.20-5.28), and change in behavior (ORparticipation = 3.67, 95% CI 1.53-8.81).ConclusionThe HHSRF has produced substantial outcomes and compared favourably with similar health research funds in other developed economies. Further studies are needed to better understand the factors and pathways associated with the translation of research findings into practice.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the effects of a government insurance program covering tertiary care for people below the poverty line in Karnataka, India, on out-of-pocket expenditures, hospital use, and mortality.DesignGeographic regression discontinuity study.Setting572 villages in Karnataka, India.Participants31,476 households (22,796 below poverty line and 8680 above poverty line) in 300 villages where the scheme was implemented and 28,633 households (21,767 below poverty line and 6866 above poverty line) in 272 neighboring matched villages ineligible for the scheme.InterventionA government insurance program (Vajpayee Arogyashree scheme) that provided free tertiary care to households below the poverty line in about half of villages in Karnataka from February 2010 to August 2012.Main outcome measureOut-of-pocket expenditures, hospital use, and mortality.ResultsAmong households below the poverty line, the mortality rate from conditions potentially responsive to services covered by the scheme (mostly cardiac conditions and cancer) was 0.32% in households eligible for the scheme compared with 0.90% among ineligible households just south of the eligibility border (difference of 0.58 percentage points, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 0.75; P<0.001). We found no difference in mortality rates for households above the poverty line (households above the poverty line were not eligible for the scheme), with a mortality rate from conditions covered by the scheme of 0.56% in eligible villages compared with 0.55% in ineligible villages (difference of 0.01 percentage points, -0.03 to 0.03; P=0.95). Eligible households had significantly reduced out-of-pocket health expenditures for admissions to hospitals with tertiary care facilities likely to be covered by the scheme (64% reduction, 35% to 97%; P<0.001). There was no significant increase in use of covered services, although the point estimate of a 44.2% increase approached significance (-5.1% to 90.5%; P=0.059). Both reductions in out-of-pocket expenditures and potential increases in use might have contributed to the observed reductions in mortality.ConclusionsInsuring poor households for efficacious but costly and underused health services significantly improves population health in India.

Project description:BackgroundThere is little systematic assessment of how total health expenditure is distributed across diseases and comorbidities. The objective of this study was to use statistical methods to disaggregate all publicly funded health expenditure by disease and comorbidities in order to answer three research questions: (1) What is health expenditure by disease phase for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in New Zealand? (2) Is the cost of having two NCDs more or less than that expected given the independent costs of each NCD? (3) How is total health spending disaggregated by NCDs across age and by sex?Methods and findingsWe used linked data for all adult New Zealanders for publicly funded events, including hospitalisation, outpatient, pharmaceutical, laboratory testing, and primary care from 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2014. These data include 18.9 million person-years and $26.4 billion in spending (US$ 2016). We used case definition algorithms to identify if a person had any of six NCDs (cancer, cardiovascular disease [CVD], diabetes, musculoskeletal, neurological, and a chronic lung/liver/kidney [LLK] disease). Indicator variables were used to identify the presence of any of the 15 possible comorbidity pairings of these six NCDs. Regression was used to estimate excess annual health expenditure per person. Cause deletion methods were used to estimate total population expenditure by disease. A majority (59%) of health expenditure was attributable to NCDs. Expenditure due to diseases was generally highest in the year of diagnosis and year of death. A person having two diseases simultaneously generally had greater health expenditure than the expected sum of having the diseases separately, for all 15 comorbidity pairs except the CVD-cancer pair. For example, a 60-64-year-old female with none of the six NCDs had $633 per annum expenditure. If she had both CVD and chronic LLK, additional expenditure for CVD separately was $6,443/$839/$9,225 for the first year of diagnosis/prevalent years/last year of life if dying of CVD; additional expenditure for chronic LLK separately was $6,443/$1,291/$9,051; and the additional comorbidity expenditure of having both CVD and LLK was $2,456 (95% confidence interval [CI] $2,238-$2,674). The pattern was similar for males (e.g., additional comorbidity expenditure for a 60-64-year-old male with CVD and chronic LLK was $2,498 [95% CI $2,264-$2,632]). In addition to this, the excess comorbidity costs for a person with two diseases was greater at younger ages, e.g., excess expenditure for 45-49-year-old males with CVD and chronic LLK was 10 times higher than for 75-79-year-old males and six times higher for females. At the population level, 23.8% of total health expenditure was attributable to higher costs of having one of the 15 comorbidity pairs over and above the six NCDs separately; of the remaining expenditure, CVD accounted for 18.7%, followed by musculoskeletal (16.2%), neurological (14.4%), cancer (14.1%), chronic LLK disease (7.4%), and diabetes (5.5%). Major limitations included incomplete linkage to all costed events (although these were largely non-NCD events) and missing private expenditure.ConclusionsThe costs of having two NCDs simultaneously is typically superadditive, and more so for younger adults. Neurological and musculoskeletal diseases contributed the largest health system costs, in accord with burden of disease studies finding that they contribute large morbidity. Just as burden of disease methodology has advanced the understanding of disease burden, there is a need to create disease-based costing studies that facilitate the disaggregation of health budgets at a national level.

Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on Removing Adult Tonsillectomy and Septoplasty from the Government Health Insurance Plan in a Publicly Funded Health Care System.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure