Sarah Thomson

Financial crisis, austerity, and health in Europe

The financial crisis in Europe has posed major threats and opportunities to health. We trace the origins of the economic crisis in Europe and the responses of governments, examine the effect on health systems, and review the effects of previous economic downturns on health to predict the likely consequences for the present. We then compare our predictions with available evidence for the effects of the crisis on health. Whereas immediate rises in suicides and falls in road traffic deaths were anticipated, other consequences, such as HIV outbreaks, were not, and are better understood as products of state retrenchment. Greece, Spain, and Portugal adopted strict fiscal austerity; their economies continue to recede and strain on their health-care systems is growing. Suicides and outbreaks of infectious diseases are becoming more common in these countries, and budget cuts have restricted access to health care. By contrast, Iceland rejected austerity through a popular vote, and the financial crisis seems to have had few or no discernible effects on health. Although there are many potentially confounding differences between countries, our analysis suggests that, although recessions pose risks to health, the interaction of fiscal austerity with economic shocks and weak social protection is what ultimately seems to escalate health and social crises in Europe. Policy decisions about how to respond to economic crises have pronounced and unintended effects on public health, yet public health voices have remained largely silent during the economic crisis.

What impact do prescription drug charges have on efficiency and equity? Evidence from high-income countries.

As pharmaceutical expenditure continues to rise, third-party payers in most high-income countries have increasingly shifted the burden of payment for prescription drugs to patients. A large body of literature has examined the relationship between prescription charges and outcomes such as expenditure, use, and health, but few reviews explicitly link cost sharing for prescription drugs to efficiency and equity. This article reviews 173 studies from 15 high-income countries and discusses their implications for important issues sometimes ignored in the literature; in particular, the extent to which prescription charges contain health care costs and enhance efficiency without lowering equity of access to care.

A Comparison Of Hospital Administrative Costs In Eight Nations: US Costs Exceed All Others By Far

A few studies have noted the outsize administrative costs of US hospitals, but no research has compared these costs across multiple nations with various types of health care systems. We assembled a team of international health policy experts to conduct just such a challenging analysis of hospital administrative costs across eight nations: Canada, England, Scotland, Wales, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States. We found that administrative costs accounted for 25.3 percent of total US hospital expenditures--a percentage that is increasing. Next highest were the Netherlands (19.8 percent) and England (15.5 percent), both of which are transitioning to market-oriented payment systems. Scotland and Canada, whose single-payer systems pay hospitals global operating budgets, with separate grants for capital, had the lowest administrative costs. Costs were intermediate in France and Germany (which bill per patient but pay separately for capital projects) and in Wales. Reducing US per capita spending for hospital administration to Scottish or Canadian levels would have saved more than

Health Care Cost Containment Strategies Used In Four Other High-Income Countries Hold Lessons For The United States

150 billion in 2011. This study suggests that the reduction of US administrative costs would best be accomplished through the use of a simpler and less market-oriented payment scheme.

Voluntary Health Insurance in the European Union: A Critical Assessment

Around the world, rising health care costs are claiming a larger share of national budgets. This article reviews strategies developed to contain costs in health systems in Canada, England, France, and Germany in 2000-10. We used a comprehensive analysis of health systems and reforms in each country, compiled by the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. These countries rely on a number of budget and price-setting mechanisms to contain health care costs. Our review revealed trends in all four countries toward more use of technology assessments and payment based on diagnosis-related groups and the value of products or services. These policies may result in a more efficient use of health care resources, but we argue that they need to be combined with volume and price controls--measures unlikely to be adopted in the United States--if they are also to meet cost containment goals.

Can user charges make health care more efficient

The authors examine the role and nature of the market for voluntary health insurance in the European Union and review the impact of public policy, at both the national and E.U. levels, on the development of this market in recent years. The conceptual framework, based on a model of industrial analysis, allows a wide range of policy questions regarding market structure, conduct, and performance. By analyzing these three aspects of the market for voluntary health insurance, the authors are also able to raise questions about the equity and efficiency of voluntary health insurance as a means of funding health care in the European Union. The analysis suggests that the market for voluntary health insurance in the European Union suffers from significant information failures that seriously limit its potential for competition or efficiency and also reduce equity. Substantial deregulation of the E.U. market for voluntary health insurance has stripped regulatory bodies of their power to protect consumers and poses interesting challenges for national regulators, particularly if the market is to expand in the future. In a deregulated environment, it is questionable whether this method of funding health care will encourage a more efficient and equitable allocation of resources.

Choice of public or private health insurance: learning from the experience of Germany and the Netherlands:

Sarah Thomson, Thomas Foubister, and Elias Mossialos explain why charging patients for health services we want them to use makes little economic sense

Regulating Private Health Insurance in the European Union: The Implications of Single Market Legislation and Competition Policy

Several European countries have considered introducing choice of public or private health insurance - usually by allowing people to ‘opt out’ of the statutory scheme - under the assumption that enhancing consumer choice and stimulating competition between insurers will be beneficial. This article examines the impact of opting out on equity and efficiency in European health systems. Focusing on Germany and the Netherlands - the only European countries where this type of choice has been available to significant population groups for a prolonged period (from 1970 to the present day in Germany, and from 1941 to 1986 in the Netherlands) - the analysis suggests that current policy debates may overstate the potential benefits of opting out. Due to market failures in health insurance and differences in the regulatory frameworks governing public and private insurers, choice of public or private coverage creates strong incentives for private insurers to select risks and leads to risk segmentation, thereby breaching equity in funding health care, heightening the financial risk borne by public insurers and lowering incentives for private insurers to operate efficiently. Measures can be taken to correct these negative effects, but some forms of regulation may be politically and technically difficult to implement.

Medical savings accounts: assessing their impact on efficiency, equity and financial protection in health care

Abstract This paper examines the implications of the single market in insurance for regulation of private health insurance in the European Union. It considers areas of uncertainty in interpreting the third non‐life insurance directive, particularly with regard to when and how governments may regulate private health insurance, and questions the Directive’s capacity to promote consumer and social protection in health insurance markets. The Directive reflects the regulatory norms of the late 1980s and early 1990s, when boundaries between ‘social security’ and ‘normal economic activity’ were still relatively well defined in most member states. Today these boundaries are increasingly blurred and, as governments look to private health insurance to ease pressure on public budgets, uncertainty about the scope of the Directive and concerns about its restrictions on material regulation are likely to grow.

How much do cancer specialists earn? A comparison of physician fees and remuneration in oncology and radiology in high-income countries

Medical savings accounts (MSAs) allow enrolees to withdraw money from earmarked funds to pay for health care. The accounts are usually accompanied by out-of-pocket payments and a high-deductible insurance plan. This article reviews the association of MSAs with efficiency, equity, and financial protection. We draw on evidence from four countries where MSAs play a significant role in the financing of health care: China, Singapore, South Africa, and the United States of America. The available evidence suggests that MSA schemes have generally been inefficient and inequitable and have not provided adequate financial protection. The impact of these schemes on long-term health-care costs is unclear. Policymakers and others proposing the expansion of MSAs should make explicit what they seek to achieve given the shortcomings of the accounts.