Examining the density in out-of-pocket spending share in the estimation of catastrophic health expenditures.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jbaily A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9170678 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Examining the density in out-of-pocket spending share in the estimation of catastrophic health expenditures.
Jbaily Abdulrahman A Haakenstad Annie A Kiros Mizan M Riumallo-Herl Carlos C Verguet Stéphane S
The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care 20210806 5
Universal health coverage (UHC) aims to provide access to health services for all without financial hardship. Moving toward UHC while ensuring financial risk protection (FRP) from out-of-pocket (OOP) health expenditures is a critical objective of the Sustainable Development Goal for Health. In tracking country progress toward UHC, analysts and policymakers usually report on two summary indicators of lack of FRP: the prevalence of catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) and the prevalence of impov ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Introduction Ghana implemented a universal health coverage scheme aimed at attaining financial risk protection against catastrophic out-of-pocket health expenditures. The effort has yielded mixed benefits for the different socio-economic profiles of the population. The present study estimates the incidence of catastrophic payments among Ghanaian households. Methods The study analyzed the round seven dataset of the Ghana Living Standards Survey collected between 2016 and 2017. We estimated the incidence and intensity of catastrophic payments for total household consumption and non-food consumption for a range of thresholds. The analysis further weighted the measures of catastrophic payments to determine the distribution sensitivity. Results As the threshold increased from 10 to 25% of total household consumption, the incidence of catastrophic payments dropped from 1.0 to 0.1%. At the 40% threshold of non-food consumption, the estimated incidence was 0.2%. For both total household consumption and non-food consumption, the concentration indices were negative at all the thresholds. The results were indicative of a higher concentration of financial catastrophe among the poorest households and significant inequalities in the incidence between the poorest and richest households. Conclusion The study confirmed the declining trend in the general incidence of catastrophic health expenditures in Ghana. However, the incidence and risk of financial catastrophe remained disproportionately higher among the poorest households, which is instructive of gaps in financial risk protection coverage. The Ghana National Health Insurance Scheme must therefore strengthen its targeting and enrolment of this sub-population group to reduce their vulnerability to catastrophic payments.
| S-EPMC10012771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Trauma is an expensive and unpredictable source of out-of-pocket spending for American families. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to improve financial protection by expanding health insurance coverage, but its association with health care spending for patients with traumatic injury remains largely unknown. Objective:To evaluate the association of ACA implementation with out-of-pocket spending, premiums, and catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) among adult patients with traumatic injury. Design, Setting, and Participants:Data from a nationally representative sample of US adults aged 19 to 64 years who had a hospital stay or emergency department visit for a traumatic injury from January 2010 to December 2017 were analyzed using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Multivariable generalized linear models were used to evaluate changes in spending after ACA implementation. Additionally, 4 income subgroups were evaluated based on ACA thresholds for program eligibility: lowest-income patients (earning 138% or less of the federal poverty level [FPL]), low-income patients (earning 139% to 250% of the FPL), middle-income patients (earning 251% to 400% of the FPL), and high-income patients (earning more than 400% of the FPL). Data were analyzed from February to December 2019. Exposures:Implementation of the ACA, beginning January 1, 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures:Out-of-pocket spending, premium spending, out-of-pocket plus premium spending, and likelihood of experiencing CHE, defined as out-of-pocket plus premium spending exceeding 19.5% of family income. Results:Of the 6288 included patients, 2995 (weighted percentage, 51.3%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 41.4 (12.8) years. Implementation of the ACA was associated with 31% lower odds of CHE (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.87; P = .002). Changes were greatest in lowest-income patients, who experienced 30% lower out-of-pocket spending (adjusted percentage change, -30.4%; 95% CI, -46.6% to -9.4%; P = .01), 26% lower out-of-pocket plus premium spending (adjusted percentage change, -26.3%; 95% CI, -41.0% to -8.1%; P = .01), and 39% lower odds of CHE (adjusted odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.84; P = .002). Low-income patients experienced decreased out-of-pocket spending and out-of-pocket plus premium spending but no changes in CHE, while middle-income and high-income patients experienced no significant changes in any spending outcome. In the post-ACA period, 1 in 11 of all patients with traumatic injury and 1 in 5 with the lowest incomes continued to experience CHE each year. Conclusions and Relevance:Implementation of the ACA was associated with improved financial protection for US adults with traumatic injury, especially lowest-income individuals targeted by the law's Medicaid expansions. Despite these gains, injured patients remain at risk of financial strain.
| S-EPMC7049078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study examines catastrophic health expenditures and the potential for such payments to impoverish South African households. The analysis applies three different catastrophic expenditure measurements, and we apply them across four South African Income and Expenditure Surveys. Since households have limited resources, they are also limited in their capacity to purchase health care. Thus, if a household devotes a large share of that capacity to health care, it may not be able to cover other necessary expenses, which could be catastrophic. The measurements differ in their definition of household capacity. Despite the differences in measurements, and, therefore, results, we find limited incidence of health care expenditure catastrophe, although larger shares of capacity are being devoted to health care in more recent years. In line with the finding that catastrophe is rare, we find that very few households are subsequently impoverished, because of health care costs.
| S-EPMC7418962 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Catastrophic out-of-pocket health expenditure (CHE) remain high in Sub-Saharan Africa and may not conform to the sporadic random pattern of acute illnesses that shapes insurance arrangements intended to avoid the risk of financial loss. The persistency of CHE remains a largely unexplored issue due to the lack of relevant methods and scarcity of panel data. This paper addresses the first shortcoming by presenting three different approaches to incorporating the timeframes into the analysis, considering dynamics between two periods, average over time and the recurrence of CHE incidence. Through the application of the complementary approaches, we identify (i) those at risk of persistent CHE in the short-term; (ii) those facing transient versus persistent CHE in the long-term; and (iii) those facing multiple CHE spells. The methods are applied to different definitions of CHE using panel data from three sub-Saharan countries: Malawi (3 waves: 2010, 2013, and 2016) with 4983 observations; Tanzania (3 waves: 2008, 2010, and 2012) with 8715 observations; and Uganda (5 waves: 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, and 2015) with 6475 observations. All datasets are balanced panels. Additionally, we employ empirical strategies to identify the underlying factors contributing to these persistent and relatively high OOP. Across the three countries, we find that at least 27% of the people facing CHE in one period, because they spent more than 5% of their household budget on health out-of-pocket, will face it again in the next period. The lower-bound risk for those spending more than 10% of their household budget is 9% and for those spending more than 25% of their household capacity to pay is 13%. Between 11% and 45% of the population incurred CHE at least twice during the observation period when using the 5% budget definition of CHE. The double recurrence rate ranges between 7% and 13% when using the 25% capacity-to-pay definition and between 3% and 20% when using the 10% budgetshare definition. Between 22% and 32% of the population experienced chronic CHE at the 5% of the budgetshare definition (6%-10% at the 10% of the budgetshare definition of CHE; 2%-11% at 25% of capacity-to-pay). Our panel regression analysis consistently highlights the susceptibility of certain groups to face persistence CHE, notably those residing in rural areas, individuals with lower levels of education, the elderly, and those who have undergone hospitalizations.
| S-EPMC11413478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, we analyzed healthcare provision and health expenditure across six Mediterranean countries that adopt the National Health System (Beveridge model) and that form part of the European Union (EU) with the main aim being that of analyzing and comparing out-of-pocket health spending in countries with a European Mediterranean connection. To this end, we considered various economic indicators and statistics to derive commonalities and differences across these countries and also compared trends in these indicators to those observed across the rest of the EU. We then analyzed these findings in light of other data related to the quality of healthcare delivery and the infrastructure of the health system and discussed recent developments in healthcare within each country and the main challenges faced by the respective health systems. The results show that on average, Mediterranean countries spend less on total healthcare expenditure (THE) than the EU average, both as a proportion of GDP, as well as in per capita terms. This is primarily driven by lower-than-EU-average public funding of healthcare. The 2008/2009 macro-economic and financial crisis had a significant impact on the countries under review, and explains the persistent reductions in public health spending as part of the austerity measures put in force across sectors. On the flipside, Mediterranean countries have a higher presence of private health providers in total funding, thereby explaining the higher Out-of-Pocket (OOPs) health expenditures in these countries relative to the EU-average. With regard to the overall health infrastructure in these countries, we observed that although the supply of physicians is largely in line with the rest of the EU, there is under-supply when it comes to hospital beds. This may be symptomatic of lower government funding. Nonetheless, all countries score highly in the evaluation of the quality of health services, as recorded by international rankings like the WHO's 2000 metric, whereas health system performance indicators, namely mortality rates and life expectancy reveal favorable health outcomes in the Mediterranean EU countries. The findings in this paper may be seen in light of the Mediterranean region's lifestyle in terms of diet, health behavior, health beliefs and shared culture. In particular, the higher out-of-pocket expenditure may reflect the tendency for one-to-one relationships with private clinicians and the pursuit of person-centered care (1). Additionally, the Mediterranean people may not be as disciplined as their European counterparts in accessing and using the public health sector. The lower THE also reflects the fact that the Mediterranean countries are less wealthy than the more economically-advanced European countries.
| S-EPMC5974227 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceMost US individuals who access abortion care pay out of pocket due to insurance coverage restrictions on abortion. More research is needed on the financial and psychological burdens of abortion seeking, particularly for those traveling across state lines for care.ObjectivesTo estimate the proportion of patients seeking abortion who incur abortion-related catastrophic health expenditures (CHEs), assess whether CHE differs between those seeking care in state vs out of state, and examine the association of CHE with mental health symptoms.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study conducted before the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, surveys were administered between January and June 2019 among individuals aged 15 to 45 years seeking abortion in 4 clinics located in abortion-supportive states (California, Illinois, and New Mexico). Participants completed self-administered questionnaires while awaiting their abortion appointment. Analyses were conducted from November 2023 to April 2024.ExposureTravel for abortion care, categorized as either out of state or in state based on participants' state of residence and the clinic location.Main outcomes and measuresSelf-reported abortion care costs and additional non-health care costs (eg, transportation, accommodation, and missed work), which were considered catastrophic if they were 40% or greater of participants' ability to pay (defined as monthly income remaining after meeting subsistence needs). Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between CHE, out-of-state travel for abortion care, and mental health symptoms including stress, anxiety, and depression.ResultsAmong the 675 participants included in the analytic sample, mean (SD) age was 27.33 (6.27) years; most were in their 20s (374 [55%]), and all but 196 (29%) sought abortion before or at 12 weeks' gestation. A total of 285 participants (42%) were estimated to incur abortion-related CHEs, which was associated with anxiety (APR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19) and depression (APR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.12-1.39). Of people traveling from out of state (212 [31%]), more were likely to incur CHEs (138 [65%]) compared with those seeking care in state (147 of 463 [32%]) (APR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.67-3.00).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of US patients seeking abortion, many individuals and their households were estimated to incur CHEs, particularly those traveling from out of state. The financial and psychological burdens of abortion seeking have likely worsened after the Dobbs decision, as more people need to cross state lines to reach abortion care. The findings suggest expansion of insurance coverage to ensure equitable access to abortion care, irrespective of people's state of residence, is needed.
| S-EPMC11549660 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE: There is limited evidence about levels of socio-economic and other differences in catastrophic health spending in Nigeria and in many sub-Saharan African countries. The study estimated the level of catastrophic healthcare expenditures for different healthcare services and facilities and their distribution across socioeconomic status (SES) groups. METHODS: The study took place in four Local Government Areas in southeast Nigeria. Data were collected using interviewer-administered questionnaires administered to 4873 households. Catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) were measured using a threshold of 40% of monthly non-food expenditure. We examined both total monthly health expenditure and disaggregated expenditure by source and type of care. RESULTS: The average total household health expenditure per month was 2354 Naira ($19.6). For outpatient services, average monthly expenditure was 1809 Naira ($15.1), whilst for inpatient services it was 610 Naira ($5.1). Higher health expenditures were incurred by urban residents and the better-off SES groups. Overall, 27% of households incurred CHE, higher for poorer socioeconomic groups and for rural residents. Only 1.0% of households had a member that was enrolled in a health insurance scheme. CONCLUSION: The worse-off households (the poorest SES and rural dwellers) experienced the highest burden of health expenditure. There was almost a complete lack of financial risk protection. Health reform mechanisms are needed to ensure universal coverage with financial risk protection mechanisms.
| S-EPMC3397929 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundTreatment of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) is costly and could expose households to financial hardship and vulnerability. This paper examines the association between medication costs of two major NCDs - hypertension (blood pressure) and diabetes, and household-level incidences of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in a South Asian LMIC, Pakistan.MethodsThe study analyzes self-reported blood pressure and diabetes (BPD) medication expenditure from the latest version (2015-16) of the Household Integrated Economic Survey (HIES) of Pakistan, a nationally representative survey of 24,238 households. The incidence of CHE is defined as households' out-of-pocket (OOP) medical expenditure exceeding 10% of the total household expenditure. Using a linear probability model, we estimate the adjusted differences in CHE incidence between households that are spending and 'not' spending on BPD medication. We also analyze several hypothetical scenarios of BPD medication cost coverage, and compare the estimated CHE incidences of respective scenarios with the status quo.ResultsWe find that the average monthly medical expenditure, and average medical expenditure share are significantly higher for households spending on BPD medication, compared to households 'not' spending. The incidence of CHE is found 6.7 percentage point higher for the households consuming BPD medication, after controlling for relevant socioeconomic attributes. If 25, 50, and 100% of the BPD medication OOP cost is covered, then the CHE incidence would reduce respectively by 5.9, 12.7, and 21.4% compared to the status quo.ConclusionMedication cost for managing two major NCDs and household catastrophic health expenditure have strong associations. The findings inform policies toward ensuring access to necessary healthcare services, and protecting households from NCD treatment related financial hardship.
| S-EPMC6334430 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesMany patients report financial stress following hospitalization for COVID-19. Although many COVID-19 survivors require extensive care after discharge, the degree to which this care contributes to financial stress is unclear. Using national data, we assessed out-of-pocket spending during the 180 days after discharge among patients hospitalized for COVID-19.Study designRetrospective cohort analysis of Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart, a national database of medical and pharmacy claims.MethodsAmong privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between March and June 2020, we calculated median out-of-pocket spending during the 180 days after discharge. For comparison, we repeated this calculation among patients hospitalized for pneumonia.ResultsOf 7932 patients with COVID-19 included in analyses, 2061 (26.0%) had private insurance. Among privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients, median (25th-75th percentile) out-of-pocket spending after discharge was $287 ($59-$842) and $271 ($63-$783), respectively. Out-of-pocket spending exceeded $2000 for 10.9% and 9.3% of these patients, respectively. Among privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients hospitalized for pneumonia, median (25th-75th percentile) out-of-pocket spending after discharge was $276 ($62-$836) and $570 ($181-$1466). Out-of-pocket spending exceeded $2000 for 12.1% and 17.2% of these patients, respectively.ConclusionsFor most patients hospitalized for COVID-19, postdischarge care may not be a major source of financial stress. Although this is reassuring, our findings also suggest that a sizable minority of COVID-19 survivors have substantial out-of-pocket spending after discharge. These survivors could be particularly vulnerable to financial toxicity if they also receive bills for the hospitalization owing to the expiration of insurer cost-sharing waivers. Insurers should consider this possibility when deciding whether to reinstate cost-sharing waivers for COVID-19 hospitalizations.
| S-EPMC9826666 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Medicare Part D has no cap on beneficiaries' out-of-pocket spending for outpatient prescription drugs, and, unlike Medicare Parts A and B, beneficiaries are prohibited from purchasing supplemental insurance that could provide such a cap. Historically, most beneficiaries whose annual Part D spending reached the catastrophic level were protected from unlimited personal liability by the Low-Income Subsidy (LIS). However, we found that the proportion of beneficiaries whose spending reached that level but did not qualify for the subsidy-and therefore remained liable for coinsurance-increased rapidly, from 18 percent in 2007 to 28 percent in 2015. Moreover, average total per person per year spending grew much more rapidly for those who did not qualify for the LIS than for those who did, primarily because of differences in price and utilization trends for the drugs that represented disproportionately large shares of their spending. We estimated that a cap for all Part D enrollees in 2015 would have raised monthly premiums by only $0.40-$1.31 per member.
| S-EPMC7268910 | biostudies-literature