Comparative Study of Fair Financing in the Health Insurance

Subject Areas : medical documents

mohammad saadati ¹ , ramin rezapour ² , naser derakhshani ³ , maryam naghshi ⁴

1 - PhD Student of Health Care Management, Road Traffic Injury Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, East Azerbaijan, Iran
2 - M.A student of Health Care Management, Iranian Center of Excellence in Health Management, Department of Health Service Management, School of Health Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, East Azerbaijan, Iran
3 - M.A Student of Health Care Management, Iranian Center of Excellence in Health Management, Department of Health Service Management, School of Health Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, East Azerbaijan, Iran
4 - M.A Student of Health Care Management, Iranian Center of Excellence in Health Management, Department of Health Service Management, School of Health Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, East Azerbaijan, Iran

Received: 2017-01-11 Accepted : 2017-05-05 Published : 2017-02-19

Keywords: Health Insurance, Fair Contribution, Equity, Financing,

Abstract :

Introduction: Fair financing contribution is one of the main objectives the healthcare systems in the world. Insurance system is one of the most common methods of financial protection against the cost of healthy people is considered. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative insurance system in different countries were performed. Methods: This comparative study was conducted in 2017. First, a comprehensive literature search was conducted through relevant and valid databases and websites to extract scientific evidence. After the screening of findings, Data related to the fairness financing, including the out of pocket, catastrophic payment and fair financing contribution was extracted. Garden classification framework used to match the indicators with models of health insurance. Results: In countries studied, four model finance and insurance including: national health insurance (NHI), national medical system (NHS), social health insurance (SHI) and private insurance was used. France and Australia are the countries where the two models are used simultaneously. The lowest rate of pay out of pocket and catastrophic health expenditure for households in France (6 and 0.01 percent), which uses public and private health insurance model. Britain, Denmark, Canada and Germany, respectively, have the highest indices were fair participation in financing. Conclusion: According to the study it can be concluded that social insurance, national insurance and national health systems can have a good performance in financial protection of the population, So can say insurance system establishing a significant role in financial protection against the cost of people's health. Of course is to be mentioned for choose the model insurance countries should be based on infrastructure and resources available in every country so well able to play its role. Introduction: Fair financing contribution is one of the main objectives the healthcare systems in the world. Insurance system is one of the most common methods of financial protection against the cost of healthy people is considered. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative insurance system in different countries were performed.Method: This comparative study was conducted in 2017. First, a comprehensive literature search was conducted through relevant and valid databases and websites to extract scientific evidence. After the screening of findings, Data related to the fairness financing was extracted. Garden classification framework used to match the indicators with models of health insurance.Result:In countries studied, four model finance and insurance including: national health insurance (NHI), national medical system (NHS), social health insurance (SHI) and private insurance was used. The lowest rate of pay out of pocket and catastrophic health expenditure for households in France (6 and 0.01 percent), which uses public and private health insurance model. Britain, Denmark, Canada and Germany, respectively, have the highest indices were fair participation in financing.Conclusion: According to the study it can be concluded that social insurance, national insurance and national health systems can have a good performance in financial protection of the population, So can say insurance system establishing a significant role in financial protection against the cost of people's health. Of course is to be mentioned for choose the model insurance countries should be based on infrastructure and resources available in every country so well able to play its role.

References:

1- Dror DM, Jacquier C. Micro‐insurance: Extending Health Insurance to the Excluded. International social security review, 1999; 52(1): 71-97.

2- King M. Community health worker extra hands for a doctor. Trans Mohammadloo S, Pashapoor N) Urmia: Takvin; 2000.

3- Peters DH, Garg A, Bloom G, Walker DG, Brieger WR, Hafizur Rahman M. Poverty and access to health care in developing countries. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2008; 1136(1): 161-71.

4- Organization WH. The world health report 2000: health systems: improving performance: World Health Organization; 2000.

5- Orszag PR, Emanuel EJ. Health care reform and cost control. New England Journal of Medicine, 2010; 363(7): 601-3.

6- Van Doorslaer E, O'Donnell O, Rannan-Eliya RP, Somanathan A, Adhikari SR, Akkazieva B, et al. Paying out-of-pocket for health care in Asia: Catastrophic and poverty impact. Erasmus University, Rotterdam and IPS, Colombo; 2005.

7- Ekman B. Catastrophic health payments and health insurance: Some counterintuitive evidence from one low-income country. Health policy, 2007; 83(2): 304-13.

8- Wade RH. Making the world development report 2000: attacking poverty. World Development, 2001; 29(8): 1435-41.

9- Spaan E, Mathijssen J, Tromp N, McBain F, Have At, Baltussen R. The impact of health insurance in Africa and Asia: a systematic review. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2012; 90(9): 685-92.

10- Berkhout E, Ostingh H. Health Insurance in Low Income Countries: Where is the evidence that it works?; 2008.

11- Carrin G, Waelkens MP, Criel B. Community‐based health insurance in developing countries: a study of its contribution to the performance of health financing systems. Tropical medicine & international health, 2005; 10(8): 799-811.

12- Churchill CD. What is insurance for the poor?  Protecting the poor: A microinsurance compendium. 11: International Labour Organization (ILO) in association with GSE Research; 2006: 11-24.

13- Zare H. Basic Health Insurance: Principles, Structure, Coverage and Regulation. Tehran: Medical Services Insurance Organization Publication; 2006: 37-45.

14- Flood C. International health care reform: a legal, economic and political analysis: Psychology Press; 2003.

14- Noland & Esmith. Ecinomic of health and health care. Garden; 2003: 532.

15- Karimi S, Ziari NB. Equity in Financial Indicators of the Health in Iran during the Third and Fourth Development Programs. Director General, 2013; 9(7).

16- Rodin J, de Ferranti D. Universal health coverage: the third global health transition? The Lancet, 2012; 380(9845): 861-2.

17- Act C. An Overview of US Health Care Delivery.9781284037753_CH01_PASS03.indd 20-1.

18- Reid TR. The healing of America: A global quest for better, cheaper, and fairer health care: Penguin; 2010.

19- World Health Organization , Europe ROf, Copenhagen. Health Care Systems in Transition Canada; 1996.

20- Marchildon GP, Mossialos E, Allin S. Health systems in transition: Canada. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Copenhagen; 2005.

21- Boyle S. Health Systems in Transition: United Kingdom (England): Health System Review: European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2011.

22- Carrin G, Desmet M, Basaza R. Social health insurance development in low-income developing countries: new roles for government and non-profit health insurance organizations. Building social security: The challenge of privatization; 2001.

23- WHO. Regional overview of social health insurance in South-East Asia. SEA-HSD-274 Regional Office for South-East Asia, New Delhi; 2004: 12-4.

24- Santerre RE, Neun SP. Health Economics: Theories, Insights, andIndustry Studies. Chicago: Irwin; 1996.

25- Kulesher RR, Forrestal EE. International models of health systems financing. Journal of Hospital Administration, 2014; 3(4): 127.

26- McPake B, Kumaranayake L, Normand CE. Health economics: An international perspective. New York, NY: Routledge; 2002.

27- Graig L. A. Health of nations: an international perspective on U.S. health care reform (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly; 1999.

28- Saltman RB, Figueras J. European health care reform: analysis of current strategies. WHO regional publications European series, 1997: 72.

29- Flood CM, Haugan A. Is Canada odd? A comparison of European and Canadian approaches to choice and regulation of the public/private divide in health care. Health Economics, Policy and Law, 2010; 5(3): 219-341.

30- Murray CJ, Xu K, Klavus J, Kawabata K, Hanvoravongchai P, Zeramdini R, et al. Assessing the distribution of household financial contributions to the health system: concepts and empirical application. Health systems performance assessment: debates, methods and empiricism Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003; 12.

31- Xu K, Evans DB, Kawabata K, Zeramdini R, Klavus J, Murray CJ. Household catastrophic health expenditure: a multicountry analysis. The lancet, 2003; 362(9378): 111-7.

32- WHO. Out-of-pocket expenditure on health as a percentage of private expenditure on health (US$) Last update: April 12, 2016 http://apps.who.int/nha/database/Select/Indicators/en.