[Radiological aspects of syndromes caused by hypoventilation and atelectasis in premature newborn infants].

S. Cutillo,A. De Blasio,D. Catalano,M. Moretti

1960-10-15

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Expanding the Catalog of Patient and Caregiver Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Systematic Literature Review

Theresa Schmidt,Christine Juday,Palak Patel,Taruja Karmarkar,Esther Renee Smith-Howell,A. Mark Fendrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/pop.2023.0238

2023-12-16

Population Health Management

Abstract:Out-of-pocket (OOP) health care expenditures in the United States have increased significantly in the past 5 decades. Most research on OOP costs focuses on expenditures related to insurance and cost-sharing payments or on costs related to specific conditions or settings, and does not capture the full picture of the financial burden on patients and unpaid caregivers. The aim for this systematic literature review was to identify and categorize the multitude of OOP costs to patients and unpaid caregivers, aid in the development of a more comprehensive catalog of OOP costs, and highlight potential gaps in the literature. The authors found that OOP costs are multifarious and underestimated. Across 817 included articles, the authors identified 31 subcategories of OOP costs related to direct medical (eg, insurance premiums), direct nonmedical (eg, transportation), and indirect spending (eg, absenteeism). In addition, 42% of articles studied an expenditure that the authors did not label as "OOP." A holistic and comprehensive catalog of OOP costs can inform future research, interventions, and policies related to financial barriers to health care in the United States to ensure the full range of costs for patients and unpaid caregivers are acknowledged and addressed.

health care sciences & services
Out-of-pocket costs near end of life in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Eleanor Reid,Arunangshu Ghoshal,Aisha Khalil,Jingjing Jiang,Charles Normand,Alexandria Brackett,Peter May

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000005

2022-01-06

Abstract:Background: Globally, there is a rise in chronic disease, including cancer, major organ failure and dementias. Patients and their families in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) pay a high proportion of medical costs out of pocket (OOP), and a diagnosis of serious illness often has catastrophic financial consequences. We therefore conducted a review of the literature to establish what is known about OOP costs near end of life in LMICs. Aims: To identify, organise and report the evidence on out-of-pocket costs in adult end-of-life populations in LMIC. Methods: A systematic search of 8 databases and a hand search of relevant systematic reviews and grey literature was performed. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, assessed papers for eligibility and extracted data. The review was registered with PROSPERO and adhered to the Preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess quality. The Wagstaff taxonomy was used to describe OOP. Results: After deduplication, 9,343 studies were screened, of which 51 were read and rejected as full texts, and 12 were included in the final review. OOP costs increased with advanced illness and disease severity. The main drivers of OOP were medications and hospitalizations, with high but variable percentages of the affected populations reporting financial catastrophe, lost income, foregone education and other pressures. Conclusion: Despite a small number of included studies and heterogeneity in methodology and reporting, it is clear that OOP costs for care near end of life in LMIC represent an important source of catastrophic health expenditures and impoverishment. This suggests a role for widespread, targeted efforts to avoid poverty traps. Financial protection policies for those suffering from incurable disease and future research on the macro- and micro- economics of palliative care delivery in LMIC are greatly needed.
Progressivity of out-of-pocket costs under Australia's universal health care system: A national linked data study

Hsei Di Law,Dinith Marasinghe,Danielle Butler,Jennifer Welsh,Emily Lancsar,Emily Banks,Nicholas Biddle,Rosemary Korda

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.10.010

IF: 3.255

Health Policy

Abstract:Background: In line with affordability and equity principles, Medicare-Australia's universal health care program-has measures to contain out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, particularly for lower income households. This study examined the distribution of OOP costs for Medicare-subsidised out-of-hospital services and prescription medicines in Australian households, according to their ability to pay. Methods: OOP costs for out-of-hospital services and medicines in 2017-18 were estimated for each household, using 2016 Australian Census data linked to Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme (PBS) claims. We derived household disposable income by combining income information from the Census linked to income tax and social security data. We quantified OOP costs as a proportion of equivalised household disposable income and calculated Kakwani progressivity indices (K). Results: Using data from 82% (n = 6,830,365) of all Census private households, OOP costs as a percentage of equivalised household disposable income decreased from 1.16% in the poorest decile to 0.63% in the richest decile for MBS services, and from 1.35% to 0.35% for PBS medicines. The regressive trend was less pronounced for MBS services (K = -0.06), with percentage OOP cost relatively stable between the 2nd and 9th income deciles; while percentage OOP cost decreased with increasing income for PBS medicines (K = -0.24). Conclusion: OOP costs for out-of-hospital Medicare services were mildly regressive while those for prescription medicines were distinctly regressive. Actions to reduce inequity in OOP costs, particularly for medicines, should be considered.
What Interventions Work to Reduce Cost Barriers to Primary Healthcare in High-Income Countries? A Systematic Review

Bailey Yee,Nisa Mohan,Fiona McKenzie,Mona Jeffreys

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081029

2024-08-05

Abstract:High-income countries like Aotearoa New Zealand are grappling with inequitable access to healthcare services. Out-of-pocket payments can lead to the reduced use of appropriate healthcare services, poorer health outcomes, and catastrophic health expenses. To advance our knowledge, this systematic review asks, "What interventions aim to reduce cost barriers for health users when accessing primary healthcare in high-income countries?" The search strategy comprised three bibliographic databases (Dimensions, Embase, and Medline Web of Science). Two authors selected studies for inclusion; discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. All articles published in English from 2000 to May 2022 and that reported on outcomes of interventions that aimed to reduce cost barriers for health users to access primary healthcare in high-income countries were eligible for inclusion. Two blinded authors independently assessed article quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program. Relevant data were extracted and analyzed in a narrative synthesis. Forty-three publications involving 18,861,890 participants and 6831 practices (or physicians) met the inclusion criteria. Interventions reported in the literature included removing out-of-pocket costs, implementing nonprofit organizations and community programs, additional workforce, and alternative payment methods. Interventions that involved eliminating or reducing out-of-pocket costs substantially increased healthcare utilization. Where reported, initiatives generally found financial savings at the system level. Health system initiatives generally, but not consistently, were associated with improved access to healthcare services.
Experiences and impacts of out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure on remote Aboriginal families

Courtney Ryder,Shane D'Angelo,Patrick Sharpe,Tamara Mackean,Nayia Cominos,Julieann Coombes,Keziah Bennett-Brook,Darryl Cameron,Emily Gloede,Shahid Ullah,Jacqueline Stephens

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH8328

Abstract:Introduction: Aboriginal Australians face significant health disparities, with hospitalisation rates 2.3 times greater, and longer hospital length of stay, than non-Indigenous Australians. This additional burden impacts families further through out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure (OOPHE), which includes additional healthcare expenses not covered by universal taxpayer insurance. Aboriginal patients traveling from remote locations are likely to be impacted further by OOPHE. The objective of this study was to examine the impacts and burden of OOPHE for rurally based Aboriginal individuals. Methods: Participants were recruited through South Australian community networks to participate in this study. Decolonising methods of yarning and deep listening were used to centralise local narratives and language of OOPHE. Qualitative analysis software was used to thematically code transcripts and organise data. Results: A total of seven yarning sessions were conducted with 10 participants. Seven themes were identified: travel, barriers to health care, personal and social loss, restricted autonomy, financial strain, support initiatives and protective factors. Sleeping rough, selling assets and not attending appointments were used to mitigate or avoid OOPHE. Government initiatives, such as the patient assistance transport scheme, did little to decrease OOPHE burden on participants. Family connections, Indigenous knowledges and engagement with cultural practices were protective against OOPHE burden. Conclusion: Aboriginal families are significantly burdened by OOPHE when needing to travel for health care. Radical change of government initiative and policies through to health professional awareness is needed to ensure equitable healthcare access that does not create additional financial hardship in communities already experiencing economic disadvantage.
Economic costs of infertility care for patients in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol

Purity Njagi,Wim Groot,Jelena Arsenijevic,Silke Dyer,Gitau Mburu,James Kiarie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042951

IF: 3.006

2020-11-10

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction: Infertility, a condition of the reproductive system, affects millions of individuals and couples worldwide. Despite infertility treatment's existence, it is largely unavailable and inaccessible in low/middle-income countries (LMICs) due to the prohibitive costs compounded by an absence of financing. Previous systematic reviews have shown that there is scanty information in LMICs on out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for infertility treatment. This protocol outlines the methodological approach and analytical process to appraise the extent of economic burden due to payments for infertility care services in LMICs. Method and analysis: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach, we will primarily search for articles indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit and PsycINFO databases. Grey literature from relevant organisations' virtual libraries shall also be searched. Backward and forward searches on the articles selected will also be done. Quantitative studies on infertility treatment costs from LMICs across the world regions within the last 20 years will be considered. The primary outcome of interest shall include OOP payments, catastrophic health expenditure and direct costs for infertility services. Conversely, informal payments and indirect costs related to infertility treatments shall be considered as secondary outcomes. Integrated quality Criteria for Review Of Multiple Study designs will be used to assess the quality of the studies included in the review. Meta-analysis shall be considered if sufficient studies identified are homogenous in characteristics. Also, the review shall analyse the average cost of infertility treatment against the respective countries' economic indicators like gross domestic product per capita if data permit. Ethics and dissemination: Research and ethics approval will not be required given this will be a review of published articles on the subject. The findings shall be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation to the WHO and its partners. Prospero registration number: CRD42020199312.
A cross-sectional analysis of out-of-pocket expenses for people living with a cancer in rural and outer metropolitan Western Australia

Neli S Slavova-Azmanova,Jade C Newton,Claire E Johnson,Harry Hohnen,Angela Ives,Sandy McKiernan,Violet Platt,Max Bulsara,Christobel Saunders

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AH19265

Abstract:Objective To determine the extent of medical and non-medical out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) among regional/rural and outer metropolitan Western Australian patients diagnosed with cancer, and the factors associated with higher costs. Methods Cross-sectional data were collected from adult patients living in four regional/rural areas and two outer metropolitan regions in Western Australia who had been diagnosed with breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer. Consenting participants were mailed demographic and financial questionnaires, and requested to report all OOPE related to their cancer treatment. Results The median total OOPE reported by 308 regional/rural participants and 119 outer metropolitan participants were A$1518 (interquartile range (IQR): A$581-A$3769) and A$2855 (IQR: A$958-A$7142) respectively. Participants most likely to experience higher total OOPE were younger than 65 years of age, male, resided in the outer metropolitan area, worked prior to diagnosis, had private health insurance, were in a relationship, and underwent surgery. Multivariate analysis of regional/rural participants revealed that receiving care at a rural cancer centre was associated with significantly lower non-medical OOPE (estimated mean A$805, 95% confidence interval (CI): A$735-A$875, P=0.038; compared with other rural participants (A$1347, 95% CI: A$743-A$1951, P<0.001)). Conclusion The cancer patients who participated in this study experienced variation in OOPE, with outer metropolitan participants reporting higher OOPE compared with their regional/rural counterparts. There is a need for cost transparency and access to care close to home, so that patients can make informed choices about where to receive their care. What is known about the topic? In recent years, OOPE for health care in general and cancer in particular have been widely debated by consumers and not-for-profit organisations; the topic has attracted much political attention because it affects both equity and access to care and has wider financial implications for the community. Research studies and reports from both consumer organisations and a Ministerial Advisory Committee found that cancer patients can face exorbitant out-of-pocket costs, and that individuals with private health insurance and those with prostate and breast cancer reported higher costs. In Western Australia, a cancer centre providing comprehensive cancer care was established in the second most populous region to ameliorate the high costs for travel and accommodation that regional cancer patients are known to experience. What does this paper add? This study is unique because it collected detailed cost information from patients and reports on the OOPE of regional/rural and outer metropolitan Western Australian patients receiving care for one of the four most common cancers; it therefore offers novel insight into the experiences of these groups. This study demonstrates that outer metropolitan cancer patients are experiencing much higher OOPE compared with regional/rural cancer patients. Additionally, regional/rural study participants who accessed a Regional Cancer Centre experienced significantly lower non-medical OOPE, compared with regional/rural study participants receiving care elsewhere. What are the implications for practitioners? First, there is a need for improved communication of OOPE to minimise costs to the patient, for example, by facilitating access to local cancer care. Health service providers and insurance companies can improve cost transparency for cancer patients by making this information more readily available, allowing patients to make informed financial choices about where to seek care. Second, the needs of working patients deserve specific attention. These patients face significant work uncertainty and additional distress following a cancer diagnosis.
Out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure in Australia: trends, inequalities and the impact on household living standards in a high-income country with a universal health care system

Emily J. Callander,Haylee Fox,Daniel Lindsay

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-019-0227-9

2019-03-11

Health Economics Review

Abstract:<p>Poor health increases the likelihood of experiencing poverty by reducing a person's ability to work and imparting costs associated with receiving medical treatment. Universal health care is a means of protecting against the impoverishing impact of high healthcare costs. This study aims to document the recent trends in the amount paid by Australian households out-of-pocket for healthcare, identify any inequalities in the distribution of this expenditure, and to describe the impact that healthcare costs have on household living standards in a high-income country with a long established universal health care system. We undertook this analysis using a longitudinal, nationally representative dataset – the <em>Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia</em> Survey, using data collected annually from 2006 to 2014. Out of pocket payments covered those paid to health practitioners, for medication and in private health insurance premiums; catastrophic expenditure was defined as spending 10% or more of household income on healthcare.Average total household expenditure on healthcare items remained relatively stable between 2006 and 2014 after adjusting for inflation, changing from $3133 to $3199. However, after adjusting for age, self-reported health status, and year, those in the lowest income group (decile one) had 15 times the odds (95% CI, 11.7–20.8) of having catastrophic health expenditure compared to those in the highest income group (decile ten). The percentage of people in income decile 2 and 3 who had catastrophic health expenditure also increased from 13% to 19% and 7% to 13% respectively.Ongoing monitoring of out of pocket healthcare expenditure is an essential part of assessing health system performance, even in countries with universal health care.</p>

economics,health policy & services
Oral Health Care Out-of-Pocket Costs and Financial Hardship: A Scoping Review

D. Proaño,H. Huang,S. Allin,B.M. Essue,S. Singhal,C. Quiñonez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345241253191

2024-10-19

Journal of Dental Research

Abstract:Journal of Dental Research, Ahead of Print. The objective of this study is to characterize how financial hardship related to oral health care (OHC) out-of-pocket (OOP) spending has been conceptualized, defined, and measured in the literature and to identify evidence gaps in this area. This scoping review follows Arksey and O'Malley's framework and synthesizes financial hardship from OHC concepts, methodologies, and evidence gaps. We searched Ovid-Medline, Ovid-Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EconLit, Business Source Premier, and the Cochrane Library. Gray literature was sourced from institutional websites (World Health Organization, United Nations, World Bank Group, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and governmental health agencies) as well as ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis Global. We used defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select studies published between 2000 and 2023. Of the 1,876 records, 65 met our criteria. The studies conceptualized financial hardship as catastrophic spending, impoverishment, negative coping strategies, bankruptcy, financial burden, food insecurity, and personal financial hardship experience. We found heterogeneity in defining OHC OOP payments and services. Also, financial hardship was frequently measured as catastrophic health expenditure using cross-sectional designs and national household spending surveys from high-income and to a lesser extent lower-middle-income countries. We identify and discuss challenges in terms of conceptualizing financial hardship, study designs, and measurement instruments in the OHC context. Some of the common evidence gaps identified include studying the causal relationship in financial hardship from OHC, assessing the financial hardship and unmet dental needs due to cost relationship, and distinguishing the effect between pain/discomfort and esthetic/cosmetic dental treatments on financial hardship. Financial hardship in OHC needs further exploration and the use of consistent definitions as well must distinguish between treatments alleviating pain/discomfort from esthetic/cosmetic treatments. Our study is relevant for policy makers and researchers aiming to monitor financial protection of OOP payments on OHC in the wake of universal health coverage for oral health.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Bleeding risk with warfarin is high among elderly.

E. Hylek,C. Evans-Molina,Carol Shea,Lori Henault,S. Regan

Journal of family practice

Abstract:
Forgone care and financial burden due to out-of-pocket payments within the German health care system

Patrick Bremer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-014-0036-0

2014-12-01

Health Economics Review

Abstract:BackgroundThe amount of out-of-pocket (OOP) payments within the German health care system has risen steadily within the last years. OOP payments aim to strengthen patients’ cost awareness and try to restrict the demand on medical necessary treatments. However, besides the intended decline of non-induced health care services there’s a risk that people also forgo necessary treatments because the utilization of health care services depends not only on need-factors but also on the ability to pay for it.Therefore, this paper aims to analyze the determinants of the total amount of OOP payments, the financial burden caused by OOP payments and the relinquishment of health care services due to OOP payments.Data and methodsThe empirical analysis is based on cross-sectional data of the German subsample (n = 2851) of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). SHARE is a representative panel study among private households with persons above the age of 50 years and covers a wide range of topics, e.g. health behavior, health status and information about the socio-economic status. The analysis of the independent variables “total amount of OOP payments”, “financial burden due to OOP payments” and “forgone care” is carried out by the means of descriptive as well as multivariate regression methods.ResultsIndividuals with low income as well as people suffering from chronic illnesses face a higher financial burden and forgo health care services more frequently at the same time. E.g. the financial burden of people who belong to the lowest income quintile is about eight times higher compared to individuals who belong to the highest quintile. The probability of forgone care for this group is about 5.6 percentage points higher [95% CI: 5.2 – 6.0].ConclusionEspecially for the group of people with chronic illnesses and low-income earners it cannot be ruled out that they also forgo necessary medical treatments due to the relatively high financial burden they face. Hence, it is required to facilitate the access to necessary care for these groups.

economics,health policy & services
The Price of Foods, Beverages, and Diets in Australia: An Updated Systematic Review

Emily Dawson,Alexandra Chung,Carmen Vargas,Kathryn Backholer,Amanda Lee,Meron Lewis,Ruby Brooks,Sally Schultz,Rebecca Bennett,Florentine Martino,Christina Zorbas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuae129

2024-09-20

Abstract:Context: The price and affordability of food are priorities for public health and health equity; however, Australia lacks a consistent method to evaluate healthy versus unhealthy diets, creating a gap in routine food price reporting. Objective: This review aimed to identify and summarize recent methods used to assess and monitor the price and/or affordability of food and beverages in Australia using a health lens. Data sources: Four academic databases (MEDLINE Complete, Global Health, CINAHL Complete, and Business Source Complete) were searched in English from 2016 to 2022. Relevant gray literature was searched through Google Scholar and government websites. Data extraction: Five reviewers screened titles and abstracts, and full-text screening was conducted by 1 reviewer, with eligibility confirmed by a second reviewer. The quality of studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute "Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies." Data analysis: Twenty-five eligible studies were identified. Eleven studies used a version of the Healthy Diets Australian Standardized Affordability and Pricing protocol to collect prices for a "healthy" diet modelled on dietary guidelines and an "unhealthy" diet based on a habitual Australian diet. These studies consistently found unhealthy diets to be more expensive than healthy diets. Other identified methods included assessing the price of household diets across healthy baskets (n = 6), store types (n = 5), a planetary health diet (n = 1), packaged foods according to their Health Star Rating (n = 1), a fruit and vegetable basket (n = 1), school canteen foods against a traffic light system (n = 1), and weekly healthy meal plans (n = 1). Healthy diets tended to be less costly than less healthy diets, but both diets were often unaffordable in regional areas, for people on low incomes, and for First Nations peoples. Conclusion: Consistent country-wide application of methods for monitoring the price and affordability of foods and diets in Australia is needed-including tailored approaches for priority groups. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022333531.
The health care utilisation and out-of-pocket expenditure associated with Australian stroke survivors aged 55 and over

David Sibbritt,Mahdie Hosseini,Wenbo Peng,Jessica Bayes,Jon Adams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265907

IF: 3.7

2022-03-24

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Objective Stroke is a major cause of mortality and disability worldwide. People with stroke have a number of options available to treat post-stroke related symptoms and challenges. The aim of this study was to assess the use of healthcare services, self-care practices and out-of-pocket expenses associated with post-stroke healthcare. Methods We retrospectively analysed data collected between April and October 2017 from a survey of 576 participants aged 55 to 96 from the 45 and Up Study, NSW (Australia), who had earlier reported a clinical diagnosis of stroke. Participants were asked about their use of health care services, including conventional medicine practitioners and medications, complementary medicine practitioners, practices and products and the respective associated out-of-pocket expenditure for each. Results Amongst the total of 576 individuals who participated in the study, 39% consulted a doctor, 18% consulted an allied health practitioner, and 8% consulted a complementary medicine practitioner in the previous year for their stroke. Participants’ average combined out-of-pocket expenditure for post-stroke related healthcare was AU$386.4 per annum. Extrapolated to all Australians with stroke, aged 55 years and over, the total out-of-pocket expenditure for post-stroke related healthcare is estimated to be AU$42 million per annum. Conclusions Post-stroke individuals used a wide range of health services and various self-care practices for stroke rehabilitation. Such healthcare utilisation is associated with significant annual out-of-pocket expenditure. Given the socioeconomic burden of stroke, further research is required to identify the barriers and facilitators of self-care among patients with stroke and explore the cost-effectiveness of the wide range of treatments(s) utilised for post-stroke care.

multidisciplinary sciences
Mineral cycling in a tropical palm forest

J. Arnason,J. Lambert,J. Gale

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02182343

IF: 4.993

1984-06-01

Plant and Soil

Abstract:
The Out-of-Pocket Cost Burden of Cancer Care—A Systematic Literature Review

Nicolas Iragorri,Claire de Oliveira,Natalie Fitzgerald,Beverley Essue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28020117

2021-03-15

Current Oncology

Abstract:Background: Out-of-pocket costs pose a substantial economic burden to cancer patients and their families. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the literature on out-of-pocket costs of cancer care. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies that estimated the out-of-pocket cost burden faced by cancer patients and their caregivers. The average monthly out-of-pocket costs per patient were reported/estimated and converted to 2018 USD. Costs were reported as medical and non-medical costs and were reported across countries or country income levels by cancer site, where possible, and category. The out-of-pocket burden was estimated as the average proportion of income spent as non-reimbursable costs. Results: Among all cancers, adult patients and caregivers in the U.S. spent between USD 180 and USD 2600 per month, compared to USD 15–400 in Canada, USD 4–609 in Western Europe, and USD 58–438 in Australia. Patients with breast or colorectal cancer spent around USD 200 per month, while pediatric cancer patients spent USD 800. Patients spent USD 288 per month on cancer medications in the U.S. and USD 40 in other high-income countries (HICs). The average costs for medical consultations and in-hospital care were estimated between USD 40–71 in HICs. Cancer patients and caregivers spent 42% and 16% of their annual income on out-of-pocket expenses in low- and middle-income countries and HICs, respectively. Conclusions: We found evidence that cancer is associated with high out-of-pocket costs. Healthcare systems have an opportunity to improve the coverage of medical and non-medical costs for cancer patients to help alleviate this burden and ensure equitable access to care.

oncology
Health service and medication costs associated with common mental disorders and subthreshold symptoms in women: Findings from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study in Australia

Mary Lou Chatterton,Jan Faller,Long Khanh-Dao Le,Lidia Engel,Lana J Williams,Julie A Pasco,Cathy Mihalopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674241229931

2024-02-14

Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract:Australian &New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, Ahead of Print. Objective:This analysis estimated 2013 annual healthcare costs associated with the common mental disorders of mood and anxiety disorders and psychological symptoms within a representative sample of Australian women.Methods:Data from the 15-year follow-up of women in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study were linked to 12-month Medicare Benefits Schedule and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme data. A Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Non-patient edition identified common mental disorders and the General Health Questionnaire 12 assessed psychological symptoms. Participants were categorised into mutually exclusive groups: (1) common mental disorder (past 12 months), (2) subthreshold (no common mental disorder and General Health Questionnaire 12 score ⩾4) or (3) no common mental disorder and General Health Questionnaire 12 score <4. Two-part and hurdle models estimated differences in service use, and adjusted generalised linear models estimated mean differences in costs between groups.Results:Compared to no common mental disorder, women with common mental disorders utilised more Medicare Benefits Schedule services (mean 26.9 vs 20.0, p < 0.001), had higher total Medicare Benefits Schedule cost ( 1305, p < 0.01), received more Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prescriptions (35.8 vs 20.6, p < 0.001), had higher total Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme cost ( 740, p < 0.05) and had significantly higher annual out-of-pocket costs for Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prescriptions ( 162, p < 0.001). Compared to no common mental disorder, subthreshold women were less likely to use any Medicare Benefits Schedule service (89.6% vs 97.0%, p < 0.01), but more likely to use mental health services (11.4% vs 2.9%, p < 0.01). The subthreshold group received more Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prescriptions (mean 43.3 vs 20.6, p < 0.001) and incurred higher total Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme cost ( 740, p < .05) compared to no common mental disorder.Conclusions:Common mental disorders and subthreshold psychological symptoms place a substantial economic burden on Australian healthcare services and consumers.

psychiatry
A systematic review of impact of person-centred interventions for serious physical illness in terms of outcomes and costs

Kennedy Bashan Nkhoma,Amelia Cook,Alessandra Giusti,Lindsay Farrant,Ruwayda Petrus,I Petersen,Liz Gwyther,Sridhar Venkatapuram,Richard Harding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054386

IF: 3.006

2022-07-13

BMJ Open

Abstract:Background: Person-centred care (PCC) is being internationally recognised as a critical attribute of high-quality healthcare. The International Alliance of Patients Organisations defines PCC as care that is focused and organised around people, rather than disease. Focusing on delivery, we aimed to review and evaluate the evidence from interventions that aimed to deliver PCC for people with serious physical illness and identify models of PCC interventions. Methods: Systematic review of literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, using the following key concepts: patient/person-centred care, family centred care, family based care, individualised care, holistic care, serious illness, chronic illness, long-term conditions from inception to April 2022. Due to heterogeneity of interventions and populations studied, narrative synthesis was conducted. Study quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs checklist. Results: We screened n=6156 papers. Seventy-two papers (reporting n=55 different studies) were retained in the review. Most of these studies (n=47) were randomised controlled trials. Our search yielded two main types of interventions: (1) studies with self-management components and (2) technology-based interventions. We synthesised findings across these two models:Self-management component: the interventions consisted of training of patients and/or caregivers or staff. Some studies reported that interventions had effect in reduction hospital admissions, improving quality of life and reducing costs of care.Technology-based interventions: consisted of mobile phone, mobile app, tablet/computer and video. Although some interventions showed improvements for self-efficacy, hospitalisations and length of stay, quality of life did not improve across most studies. Discussion: PCC interventions using self-management have some effects in reducing costs of care and improving quality of life. Technology-based interventions improves self-efficacy but has no effect on quality of life. However, very few studies used self-management and technology approaches. Further work is needed to identify how self-management and technology approaches can be used to manage serious illness. Prospero registration number: CRD42018108302.
Comparison of the out-of-pocket costs of Medicare-funded telepsychiatry and face-to-face consultations: A descriptive study

Luke S-C Woon,Stephen Allison,Tarun Bastiampillai,Steve Kisely,Paul Maguire,William Pring,Rebecca Reay,Jeffrey Cl Looi,Jeffrey CL Looi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241237128

2024-03-06

Australasian Psychiatry

Abstract:Australasian Psychiatry, Ahead of Print. ObjectiveTelepsychiatry items in the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) were expanded following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, their out-of-pocket costs have not been examined. We describe and compare patient out-of-pocket payments for face-to-face and telepsychiatry (videoconferencing and telephone) MBS items for outpatient psychiatric services to understand the differential out-of-pocket cost burden for patients across these modalities.Methodsout-of-pocket cost information was obtained from the Medical Costs Finder website, which extracted data from Services Australia's Medicare claims data in 2021–2022. Cost information for corresponding face-to-face, video, and telephone MBS items for outpatient psychiatric services was compared, including (1) Median specialist fees; (2) Median out-of-pocket payments; (3) Medicare reimbursement amounts; and (4) Proportions of patients subject to out-of-pocket fees.ResultsMedicare reimbursements are identical for all comparable face-to-face and telepsychiatry items. Specialist fees for comparable items varied across face-to-face to telehealth options, with resulting differences in out-of-pocket costs. For video items, higher proportions of patients were not bulk-billed, with greater out-of-pocket costs than face-to-face items. However, the opposite was true for telephone items compared with face-to-face items.ConclusionsInitial cost analyses of MBS telepsychiatry items indicate that telephone consultations incur the lowest out-of-pocket costs, followed by face-to-face and video consultations.

psychiatry
Patient Perceived Financial Burden in Haematological Malignancies: A Systematic Review.

Catriona Parker,Danielle Berkovic,Darshini Ayton,Ella Zomer,Danny Liew,Andrew Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol29060305

2022-06-24

Current Oncology

Abstract:Advances in scientific understanding have led to novel therapies and improved supportive care for many patients with haematological malignancies. However, these new drugs are often costly, only available at centralised health care facilities, require regular specialist reviews and lengthy treatment regimens. This leads to a significant financial burden. Understanding the impact of financial burden on haematological patients is important to appreciate the urgency of alleviating this systemic issue. Eligible studies were identified by systematically searching Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Embase. Self-reported data reported in both quantitative and qualitative studies that described the financial burden for patients with haematological malignancies were included. Quality appraisal of the included studies was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute tools. A narrative synthesis was employed. For quantitative studies, outcomes were extracted, tabulated and categorised to find similarities and differences between the studies. For qualitative studies, quotations, codes and themes were extracted and then clustered. An inductive approach derived qualitative themes. Twenty studies were identified for inclusion. Of the quantitative studies most (83%) employed un-validated researcher-generated measures to assess financial burden. Between 15-59% of patients experienced a financial burden. Out-of-pocket expenditure was frequent for clinical appointments, prescription and non-prescription medication, and travel. Financial burden was associated with a worsening quality of life and living in metropolitan areas, but there was no evidence for impact on survival. Patient-centred experiences from the qualitative inquiry complemented the quantitative findings and five themes were determined: familial or household impact; reliance on others; barriers to care due to cost; and barriers to accessing financial assistance and sources of out-of-pocket expenses. The impacts of financial burden are yet to be fully appreciated in haematological malignancies, exacerbated by the heterogeneous methods employed by researchers. Future work should focus on identifying the long-term ramifications of financial burden for patients and should trial interventions to reduce its prevalence and patient impacts.

oncology
The impact of management option on out-of-pocket costs and perceived financial burden among men with localised prostate cancer in Australia within 6 months of diagnosis

Daniel Lindsay,Penelope Schofield,Doreen Nabukalu,Matthew J. Roberts,John Yaxley,Stephen Quinn,Natalie Richards,Mark Frydenberg,Robert Gardiner,Nathan Lawrentschuk,Ilona Juraskova,Declan G. Murphy,Louisa G. Gordon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/ah23231

2024-02-14

Australian Health Review

Abstract:This study aimed to quantify the out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and perceived financial burden among Australian men with localised prostate cancer in the first 6 months after diagnosis, by primary management option. This cost-analysis quantified OOP costs using administrative claims data and self-reported survey data. Financial burden was assessed using the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity–Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (COST-FACIT) tool. Participants were recruited into a randomised control trial from public or private treatment centres in Victoria and Queensland. Generalised linear models were used to predict OOP costs and COST-FACIT scores. Median total OOP costs within 6 months of diagnosis for 256 Australian patients with localised prostate cancer was A 343–2548). Up to 50% of the sample reported A$0 costs for most medical services. Compared with those managed with active surveillance, men having active treatment had 6.4 (95% CI: 3.2–12.7) times greater total OOP costs. Management option, higher Gleason score at diagnosis and having multiple comorbidities were significant predictors of higher OOP costs. Overall high scores on the COST-FACIT indicated low levels of financial burden for the entire sample. Largely attributable to being managed with active surveillance, Australian men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer reported relatively low OOP costs and financial burden in the first 6 months post-diagnosis. Together with clinical outcomes, clinicians can use this up to date evidence on costs and perceived financial burdens to assist localised prostate cancer patients and their families make informed decisions about their preferred management option.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services

[Radiological aspects of syndromes caused by hypoventilation and atelectasis in premature newborn infants].

Expanding the Catalog of Patient and Caregiver Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Systematic Literature Review

Out-of-pocket costs near end of life in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Progressivity of out-of-pocket costs under Australia's universal health care system: A national linked data study

What Interventions Work to Reduce Cost Barriers to Primary Healthcare in High-Income Countries? A Systematic Review

Experiences and impacts of out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure on remote Aboriginal families

Economic costs of infertility care for patients in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol

A cross-sectional analysis of out-of-pocket expenses for people living with a cancer in rural and outer metropolitan Western Australia

Out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure in Australia: trends, inequalities and the impact on household living standards in a high-income country with a universal health care system

Oral Health Care Out-of-Pocket Costs and Financial Hardship: A Scoping Review

Bleeding risk with warfarin is high among elderly.

Forgone care and financial burden due to out-of-pocket payments within the German health care system

The Price of Foods, Beverages, and Diets in Australia: An Updated Systematic Review

The health care utilisation and out-of-pocket expenditure associated with Australian stroke survivors aged 55 and over

Mineral cycling in a tropical palm forest

The Out-of-Pocket Cost Burden of Cancer Care—A Systematic Literature Review

Health service and medication costs associated with common mental disorders and subthreshold symptoms in women: Findings from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study in Australia

A systematic review of impact of person-centred interventions for serious physical illness in terms of outcomes and costs

Comparison of the out-of-pocket costs of Medicare-funded telepsychiatry and face-to-face consultations: A descriptive study

Patient Perceived Financial Burden in Haematological Malignancies: A Systematic Review.

The impact of management option on out-of-pocket costs and perceived financial burden among men with localised prostate cancer in Australia within 6 months of diagnosis