Dataset Information

Patients' choice of healthcare providers and predictors of modern healthcare utilisation in Bangladesh: Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) 2016-2017 (BBS).

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The number of modern healthcare providers in Bangladesh has increased and they are well equipped with modern medical instruments and infrastructures. Despite this development, patients seeking treatment from alternative healthcare providers are ongoing. Hence, this study aims to determine the underlying predictors of patients' choosing modern healthcare providers and health facilities for getting treatments.

Setting

Data from the nationally representative Household Income and Expenditure Survey 2016-2017 conducted by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics were used.

Participants

34 512 respondents sought treatment for their illnesses from different types of available healthcare providers.

Primary and secondary outcome measure

Patients' choice of healthcare providers (primary) and predictors of patients' choice of modern healthcare providers (secondary).

Results

The study found that 40% of the patients visit modern healthcare providers primarily on having symptoms of illness, and the remainder goes to alternative healthcare providers. Patients living in urban areas (adjusted OR (AOR)=1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17, p<0.01), and if the travel time was between 1 and 2 hours (AOR=1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.22, p<0.05) compared with travel time less than 1 hour, were positively associated to utilisation of modern healthcare facilities for their first consultation. The statistical models show that the predisposing and need factors do not significantly impact patients' choice of modern healthcare providers.

Conclusions

The distribution of modern healthcare providers should be even across the country to eliminate the rural-urban divide in modern healthcare utilisation. Enhancing the digital provision of modern healthcare services could reduce travel time, omit transportation costs and save waiting time for treatment by the modern healthcare providers. Policymakers can think of introducing a national health insurance programme in Bangladesh as a potential policy instrument.

SUBMITTER: Imtiaz A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8650487 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRural‒urban disparity in catastrophic healthcare expenditure (CHE) is a well-documented challenge in low- and middle-income countries, including Bangladesh, limiting financial protection and hindering the achievement of the Universal Health Coverage target of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, the factors driving this divide remain poorly understood. Therefore, this study aims to identify the key determinants of the rural‒urban disparity in CHE incidence in Bangladesh and their changes over time.MethodsWe used nationally representative data from the latest three rounds of the Bangladesh Household Income and Expenditure Survey (2005, 2010, and 2016). CHE incidence among households seeking healthcare was measured using the normative food, housing, and utilities method. To quantify covariate contributions to the rural‒urban CHE gap, we employed the Oaxaca-Blinder multivariate decomposition approach, adapted by Powers et al. for nonlinear response models.ResultsCHE incidence among rural households increased persistently during the study period (2005: 24.85%, 2010: 25.74%, 2016: 27.91%) along with a significant (p-value ≤ 0.01) rural‒urban gap (2005: 9.74%-points, 2010: 13.94%-points, 2016: 12.90%-points). Despite declining over time, substantial proportions of CHE disparities (2005: 87.93%, 2010: 60.44%, 2016: 61.33%) are significantly (p-value ≤ 0.01) attributable to endowment differences between rural and urban households. The leading (three) covariate categories consistently contributing significantly (p-value ≤ 0.01) to the CHE gaps were composition disparities in the lowest consumption quintile (2005: 49.82%, 2010: 36.16%, 2016: 33.61%), highest consumption quintile (2005: 32.35%, 2010: 15.32%, 2016: 18.39%), and exclusive reliance on informal healthcare sources (2005: -36.46%, 2010: -10.17%, 2016: -12.58%). Distinctively, the presence of chronic illnesses in households emerged as a significant factor in 2016 (9.14%, p-value ≤ 0.01), superseding the contributions of composition differences in household heads with no education (4.40%, p-value ≤ 0.01) and secondary or higher education (7.44%, p-value ≤ 0.01), which were the fourth and fifth significant contributors in 2005 and 2010.ConclusionsRural‒urban differences in household economic status, educational attainment of household heads, and healthcare sources were the key contributors to the rural‒urban CHE disparity between 2005 and 2016 in Bangladesh, with chronic illness emerging as a significant factor in the latest period. Closing the rural‒urban CHE gap necessitates strategies that carefully address rural‒urban variations in the characteristics identified above.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Because of the rapid increase of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and high burden of healthcare-related financial issues in Bangladesh, there is a concern that out-of-pocket (OOP) payments related to illnesses may become a major burden on household. It is crucial to understand what are the major illnesses responsible for high OPP at the household level to help policymakers prioritize key areas of actions to protect the household from 100% financial hardship for seeking health care as part of universal health coverage. OBJECTIVES:We first estimated the costs of illnesses among a population in urban Bangladesh, and then assessed the household financial burden associated with these illnesses. METHOD:A cross-sectional survey of 1593 randomly selected households was carried out in Bangladesh (urban area of Rajshahi city), in 2011. Catastrophic expenditure was estimated at 40% threshold of household capacity to pay. We employed the Bayesian two-stage hurdle model and Bayesian logistic regression model to estimate age-adjusted average cost and the incidence of household financial catastrophe for each illness, respectively. RESULTS:Overall, approximately 45% of the population of Bangladesh had at least one episode of illness. The age-sex-adjusted average medical expenses and catastrophic health care expenditure among the households were TK 621 and 8%, respectively. Households spent the highest amount of money 7676.9 on paralysis followed by liver disease (TK 2695.4), injury (TK 2440.0), mental disease (TK 2258.0), and tumor (TK 2231.2). These diseases were also responsible for higher incidence of financial catastrophe. Our study showed that 24% of individuals who suffered typhoid incurred catastrophic expenditure followed by liver disease (12.3%), tumor (12.1%), heart disease (8.4%), injury (7.9%), mental disease (7.9%), cataract (7.1%), and paralysis (6.5%). CONCLUSION:The study findings suggest that chronic illnesses were responsible for high costs and high catastrophic expenditures in Bangladesh. Effective risk pooling mechanism might reduce household financial burden related to illnesses. Chronic illness related to NCDs is the major cause of OOP. It is also important to consider prioritizing vulnerable population by subsidizing the high health care cost for some of the chronic illnesses.

Project description:BackgroundWhile healthcare costs for rotavirus gastroenteritis requiring hospitalization may be burdensome on households in Malaysia, exploration on the distribution and catastrophic impact of these expenses on households are lacking.ObjectivesWe assessed the economic burden, levels and distribution of catastrophic healthcare expenditure, the poverty impact on households and inequities related to healthcare payments for acute gastroenteritis requiring hospitalization in Malaysia.MethodsA two-year prospective, hospital-based study was conducted from 2008 to 2010 in an urban (Kuala Lumpur) and rural (Kuala Terengganu) setting in Malaysia. All children under the age of 5 years admitted for acute gastroenteritis were included. Patients were screened for rotavirus and information on healthcare expenditure was obtained.ResultsOf the 658 stool samples collected at both centers, 248 (38%) were positive for rotavirus. Direct and indirect costs incurred were significantly higher in Kuala Lumpur compared with Kuala Terengganu (US$222 Vs. US$45; p<0.001). The mean direct and indirect costs for rotavirus gastroenteritis consisted 20% of monthly household income in Kuala Lumpur, as compared with only 5% in Kuala Terengganu. Direct medical costs paid out-of-pocket caused 141 (33%) households in Kuala Lumpur to experience catastrophic expenditure and 11 (3%) households to incur poverty. However in Kuala Terengganu, only one household (0.5%) experienced catastrophic healthcare expenditure and none were impoverished. The lowest income quintile in Kuala Lumpur was more likely to experience catastrophic payments compared to the highest quintile (87% vs 8%). The concentration index for out-of-pocket healthcare payments was closer to zero at Kuala Lumpur (0.03) than at Kuala Terengganu (0.24).ConclusionsWhile urban households were wealthier, healthcare expenditure due to gastroenteritis had more catastrophic and poverty impact on the urban poor. Universal rotavirus vaccination would reduce both disease burden and health inequities in Malaysia.

Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate average annual expenditures per person, total economic burden and distress health financing associated with the treatment of five cardio-metabolic diseases (CMDs-hypertension, diabetes, heart disease (angina, myocardial infarction and heart failure), stroke and chronic kidney disease) in three metropolitan cities in South Asia.DesignCross-sectional surveys.SettingWe analysed community-based baseline data from the Centre for cArdio-metabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS) Study collected in 2010-2011 representing Chennai and New Delhi (India), and Karachi (Pakistan).ParticipantsWe used data from non-pregnant adults (≥20 years) from the aforementioned cities that responded to a cost-of-illness questionnaire. We estimated health utilisation and expenditures among those reporting taking treatment(s) for the aforementioned CMDs in the last 1 year. We converted all costs to International Dollars (Int$ 2011) and inflated to 2018 values. The annual costs per person were stratified by city, sociodemographic characteristics, contributor of costs and financing methods. The total economic burden of CMDs for each city was projected using age-standardised prevalence and per-person costs of diseases reported in CARRS, applying these to population data from the most recent census. We also calculated distress financing (DF) as having to borrow or sell assets to pay for CMD treatment and identified sociodemographic groups at most risk of DF using multiple regression.ResultsOf 16 287 CARRS participants, 2883 (17.7%) reported receiving treatment for CMDs. The total annual expenditures reported per patient for CMDs ranged from Int$358 to Int$2425. Medications constituted 46% of total direct expenditures and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures accounted for nearly 80% of financing these health expenditures. Total economic burdens of CMDs were Int$0.42 billion, Int$3.4 billion and Int$1.4 billion in Chennai, New Delhi and Karachi, respectively. Overall, 36.1% experienced DF, and women (OR=4.4), unemployed (OR=10.7) and uninsured (OR=8.1) adults experienced higher odds of DF.ConclusionCMDs are associated with large economic burdens in South Asia. Due to most payments coming from OOP expenditures and limited insurance, the odds of DF are high.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to assess patients' healthcare-seeking preferences in mild, chronic, and serious illness; identify influential factors; and examine the reasons underlying patients' healthcare-seeking preference. DESIGN:A retrospective study. SETTING:The study was conducted in 14 tertiary hospitals in Shanghai, China. PARTICIPANTS:Questionnaires were distributed to 1519 patients, and 1114 were completed and returned. All patients participated in the study voluntarily, provided written informed consent, and possessed the ability to complete the questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:We measured and compared preferences and choice of healthcare providers in patients if they had experienced mild, chronic, or serious illness. RESULTS:More than 50% of participants, including those who were >60 years of age, had consulted a doctor more than three times during the preceding year, were single, and were most likely to decide not to seek medical treatment. Community health facilities were the most frequently selected healthcare provider in mild illness. In addition, patients who had no personal preference, did not express a preference for a good environment or first-class medical technology, were concerned about close proximity and short waiting times, and pursued low medical costs were most likely to choose a community health facility. General hospitals were the most frequently selected healthcare provider in chronic and serious illness. In addition, patients who earned higher monthly incomes, did not pursue low medical costs, were not concerned about short waiting times or close proximity, and expressed a preference for first-class medical technology, were most likely to choose general hospitals. CONCLUSION:Patients' healthcare-seeking preference was influenced mainly by healthcare providers' characteristics, illness severity, and sociodemographic characteristics. These findings indicate that patients' current healthcare-seeking preference was not ideal and requires optimisation.