Background Private health insurance plays a critical role in healthcare financing, yet its utilization and determinants in rural settings still need to be studied, particularly in Central India. This study aims to address this gap by investigating the utilization and determinants of private health insurance schemes among residents of rural communities in Central India. Materials and methods A convergent parallel mixed-method study design, consisting of quantitative and qualitative approaches, will be employed. Quantitative data will be collected through structured questionnaires administered to residents aged 18 and above within the field practice area of a tertiary medical college hospital. Qualitative data will be gathered through in-depth interviews with key stakeholders. Statistical analysis will include descriptive and inferential statistics, while thematic analysis will be employed for qualitative data (CTRI Number CTRI/2024/06/069155). Conclusion The findings of this study will provide valuable insights into the utilization and determinants of private health insurance schemes in rural communities of Central India. By identifying barriers and facilitators to insurance uptake, policymakers and healthcare providers can develop targeted interventions to improve healthcare access and affordability in rural areas. In addition, the study will contribute to the existing literature on private health insurance utilization in India, informing future research endeavors and policy initiatives.

OBJECTIVE: Patient reported experience measures (PREMs) are tools often utilised in hospitals to support quality improvements and to provide objective feedback on care experiences. Less commonly PREMs can be used to support consumers choices in their hospital care. Little is known about the experience and views of the Australian consumer regarding PREMs nor the considerations these consumers have when they need to make decisions about attending hospital. This study aimed to explore consumer awareness of PREMs, consumer attitudes towards PREMs and the utility of PREMs as a decision-making tool in accessing hospital care.
METHODS: Qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews conducted over the phone. Participants (n = 40) were recruited from across Australia and purposively sampled according to key characteristics: holding private health insurance, > 30-years of age, may have accessed private hospital care in the past year, variety of educational and cultural backgrounds, and if urban or rural residing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.
RESULTS: Four overarching themes and six subthemes were identified from the data. Major findings were that prior awareness of PREMs was limited; however, many had filled in a PREM either for themselves or for someone they cared for following a hospital stay. Most respondents preferred to listen to experience of self or family/friends or the recommendation of their physician when choosing a hospital to attend. Participants appeared to be more interested in the treating clinician than the hospital with this clinician often dictating the hospital or hospital options. If provided choice in hospital, issues of additional costs, timeliness of treatment and location were important factors.
CONCLUSIONS: While PREMs were considered a possible tool to assist in hospital decision-making process, previous hospital experiences, the doctor and knowing up-front cost are an overriding consideration for consumers when choosing their hospital. Consideration to format and presentation of PREMs data is needed to facilitate understanding and allow meaningful comparisons. Future research could examine the considerations of those consumers who primarily access public healthcare facilities and how to improve the utility of PREMs.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases are a major public health issue and the leading cause of mortality globally. The global economic burden of out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) for cardiovascular surgeries and procedures is substantial, with average costs being significantly higher than other treatments. This imposes a heavy economic burden. Government insurance schemes like Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB-PMJAY) aim to enhance affordability and access to cardiac care.
METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed OOPE incurred for top cardiac surgeries under AB-PMJAY, private insurance, and uninsured patients at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Karnataka. Data of 1021 patients undergoing common cardiac procedures from January to July 2023 were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean, median) and the Shapiro-Wilk test for normality. The study aims to evaluate financial risk protection offered by AB-PMJAY compared to private plans and inform effective policy-making in reducing the OOPE burden for surgeries in India.
RESULTS: The study analyzed OOPE across 1021 patients undergoing any of four surgeries at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Karnataka. AB-PMJAY patients incurred zero OOPE across all surgeries. Uninsured patients faced the highest median OOPE, ranging from ₹1,15,292 (1390.57 USD) to ₹1,72,490 (2080.45 USD) depending on surgery type. Despite the presence of private insurance, the median out-of-pocket expenditure ranged from ₹1,689 (20.38 USD) to ₹68,788 (829.67 USD). Significant variations in OOPE were observed within different payment groups. Private insurance in comparison with AB-PMJAY had limitations like co-payments, deductibles, and limited coverage resulting in higher OOPE for patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The results illustrate the efficacy of AB-PMJAY in reducing the financial burden and improving the affordability of cardiac procedures compared to private insurance. This emphasizes the significance of programmmes funded by the government in reducing the OOPE burden and ensuring equitable healthcare access. The comprehensive and particular estimates of OOPE for different surgical procedures, categorized by payment methods provide valuable information to guide the development of policies that aim to reduce OOPE and progress toward universal health coverage in India.

BACKGROUND: Supplemental private health insurance (PHI) plays a crucial role in complementing China\'s social health insurance (SHI). However, the effectiveness of incorporating PHI as supplementary coverage lacks conclusive evidence regarding its impact on healthcare utilization and seeking behavior among SHI-covered individuals. Therefore, investigating the effects of supplementary PHI on health care utilization and seeking behavior of residents covered by social health insurance is essential to provide empirical evidence for informed decision-making within the Chinese healthcare system.
METHODS: Data from the 2018 China National Health Services Survey were analyzed to compare outpatient and inpatient healthcare utilization and choices between PHI purchasers and non-purchasers across three SHI schemes: urban employee-based basic medical insurance (UEBMI), urban resident-based basic medical insurance (URBMI), and the new rural cooperative medical scheme (NRCMS). Using the Andersen Healthcare Services Utilization Behavior Model as the theoretical framework,binary logistic regression and multinomial logistic regression (MNL) models were employed to assess the impact of PHI on healthcare utilization and provider preferences.
RESULTS: Among UEBMI, URBMI, and NRCMS participants with PHI, outpatient visit rates were 17.9, 19.8, and 21.7%, and inpatient admission rates were 12.4, 9.9, and 12.9%, respectively. Participants without PHI exhibited higher rates for outpatient visits (23.6, 24.3, and 25.6%) and inpatient admissions (15.2, 12.8, and 14.5%). Binomial logistic regression analyses revealed a higher probability of outpatient visits and inpatient admissions among UEBMI participants with PHI (p < 0.05). NRCMS participants with PHI showed a lower probability of outpatient visits but a higher probability of inpatient admissions (p < 0.05). Multinomial logistic regression indicated that NRCMS participants with PHI were more likely to choose higher-level hospitals, with a 17% increase for county hospitals and 27% for provincial or higher-level hospitals compared to primary care facilities.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that the possession of PHI correlated with increased utilization of outpatient and inpatient healthcare services among participants covered by UEBMI. Moreover, for participants under the NRCMS, the presence of PHI is linked to a proclivity for seeking outpatient care at higher-level hospitals and heightened utilization of inpatient services. These results underscore the nuanced influence of supplementary PHI on healthcare-seeking behavior, emphasizing variations across individuals covered by distinct SHI schemes.

Rural residents are generally less likely to receive preventive healthcare than are urban residents, but variable measurement of rurality introduces inconsistency to these findings. We assessed the relationships between perceived and objective measures of rurality and uptake of preventive healthcare. In our sample, rural participants generally had equal or higher uptake of healthcare (i.e. private health insurance, check-up in the past year, being up-to-date on colorectal and cervical cancer screening) than urban participants. Importantly, the perceived measure of rurality performed similarly to the objective measures, suggesting that participant report could be a valid way to assess rurality in health studies. Significance for Public Health The ability to access routine preventive healthcare is a key component of public health. Comparing uptake of cancer screening in rural versus urban areas is one way to assess equity of healthcare access. Generally, rural areas have a higher burden of cancer than urban areas. The built environment, socioeconomic status, and patient perceptions can impact an individual\'s access to routine cancer screening. Preventive healthcare is of great importance to public health as a whole because screening can facilitate earlier diagnosis and more successful treatment for many preventable cancers, which may ultimately increase the quality and quantity of life.

BACKGROUND: Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are a leading threat to population health in Saudi Arabia. Addressing NCDs is a priority for health-care transformation, and understanding the current disease prevalence is crucial. The prevalence in other settings is unknown because studies have relied on data from households or public health-care institutions. This study aims to investigate the prevalence and predictors of diabetes in the privately insured population.
METHODS: This retrospective study explored the prevalence and predictors of diabetes in beneficiaries aged 15 years or older who sought medical care in 2022. Data were sourced from the National Platform for Health and Insurance Exchange Services, a unified health insurance claim platform. We used the International Classification of Disease-10 to capture the condition. To identify predictors of diabetes, we employed a backward selection approach for logistic regression.
RESULTS: Over 3.3 million beneficiaries sought medical care during the study. The population was relatively young aged 26-39 years, (47.5%) and two-thirds of males. The prevalence of diabetes was 11.0% and varied across regions, with the highest in Bahah (18.4%) and the lowest in Jizan (9.5%). Age, gender, nationality, insurance company size, body mass index, region, hypertension, and coronary heart disease were significant predictors of diabetes. Hypertensive patients were over five times more likely to have diabetes than those without hypertension (odds ratio OR = 5.08; 95% confidence interval CI = 5.02-5.24). Saudis were 30% more likely to have diabetes than other nationalities (OR = 1.3; 95% CI = 1.28-1.31).
CONCLUSIONS: We found a higher prevalence of diabetes in privately insured beneficiaries than the recent national estimate. This necessitates population health management strategies at all levels (primary, secondary, and tertiary) to mitigate the burden of diabetes in privately insured individuals. This study provides valuable baseline data for the prevalence of diabetes in this population and emphasizes the urgent need for targeted interventions, especially in regions with a higher prevalence.

UNASSIGNED: Inequality in health care access is a socioeconomic driver for non-communicable disease related risk factors. This study examined the inequality trend in healthcare cost coverage (HCC) compared to private health insurance (PHI) coverage, a subtype of HCC, over 5 years. The study will also determine the association between HCC (and PHI) and the status of hypertension and diabetes diagnosis.
UNASSIGNED: The rich-poor ratio, concentration curve and concentration index were derived to determine the level of inequality. Furthermore, logistic regression was done to determine the association between HCC and the status of hypertension and diabetes.
UNASSIGNED: The PHI group (rich-poor ratio: 1.4 [rich: 454, poor: 314] and 2.6 [rich: 375, poor: 142]; concentration index: 0.123 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.093-0.153] and 0.144 [95% CI: 0.109-0.178] in 2013 and 2018, respectively) has relatively higher inequality compared with the HCC group (rich-poor ratio: 0.9 [rich: 307, poor: 337] and 1.1 [rich: 511, poor: 475]; concentration index: -0.027 [95% CI: -0.053 to -0.000] and -0.014 [95% CI: -0.033 to 0.006] in 2013 and 2018, receptively). Contrasting to the observation with the HCC group, PHI was associated with higher odds for hypertension (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.252, p = 0.01, 95% CI: 1.051-1.493) and diabetes (aOR = 1.287, p = 0.02, 95% CI: 1.041-1.590) in 2018.
UNASSIGNED: Over 5 years, the inequality in PHI coverage remained higher compared with HCC, which suggests that the rich enjoyed private healthcare more. Furthermore, those with PHI were more likely to report known hypertension and diabetes in 2018. It is reasonable to assume that those with PHI are more likely to have earlier diagnoses compared to others and are more likely to be aware of their condition. Policymakers need to identify strategies that can narrow the existing gap in quality and type of service between the private and public health sectors.

The Australian government pays $6.7 billion per year in rebates to encourage Australians to purchase private health insurance (PHI) and an additional $6.1 billion to cover services provided in private hospitals. What is the justification for large government subsidies to a private industry when all Australians already have free coverage under Medicare? The government argues that more people buying PHI will relieve the burden on the public system and may reduce waiting times. However, the evidence supporting this is sparse. We use an instrumental variable approach to study the causal effects of higher PHI coverage in the area on waiting times in public hospitals in the same area. The instrument used is area-level average house prices, which correlate with average income and wealth, thus influencing the purchase of PHI due to tax incentives, but not directly affecting waiting times in public hospitals. We use 2014-2018 hospital admission and elective surgery waiting list data linked at the patient level from the Victorian Center for Data Linkage. These data cover all inpatient admissions in all hospitals in Victoria (both public and private hospitals) and those registered on the waiting list for elective surgeries in public hospitals in Victoria. We find that one percentage point increase in PHI coverage leads to about 0.34 days (or 0.5%) reduction in waiting times in public hospitals on average. The effects vary by surgical specialities and age groups. However, the practical significance of this effect is limited, if not negligible, despite its statistical significance. The small effect suggests that raising PHI coverage with the aim to taking the pressure off the public system is not an effective strategy in reducing waiting times in public hospitals. Alternative policies aiming at improving the efficiency of public hospitals and advancing equitable access to care should be a priority for policymakers.

The vital role of healthcare financing in achieving universal health coverage is indisputable. However, most countries, including Malaysia, face challenges in establishing an equitable and sustainable healthcare financing system due to escalating healthcare costs, an ageing population and a growing disease burden. With desirable pre-payment and risk pooling features, private health insurance (PHI) is considered an alternative financing option to reduce out-of-pocket (OOP) medical expenditure. However, ongoing theoretical and empirical debates persist regarding the adequacy of financial risk protection provided by PHI largely because it depends on its role, the benefit design and the regulations in place. Our study aimed to investigate the effect of supplementary PHI on OOP inpatient medical expenditure in Malaysia. Secondary data analysis was conducted using the Malaysian National Health and Morbidity Survey 2019 dataset. A total of 983 respondents with a history of inpatient hospitalization in the past 12 months were included in the study. Instrumental variable analysis using a two-stage residual inclusion was performed to address endogeneity bias, with wealth status and education level as the instrumental variables. Tobit regression model was used in the second stage considering the censored distribution of the outcome variable. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation. About one-fifth of the respondents had PHI. In this study, we found that having PHI significantly increased OOP inpatient medical expenditure in all three marginal effects. Additionally, age, residential location, ethnicity (citizenship), being covered by government guarantee letter, government funding and employer-sponsored health insurance were other significant factors associated with OOP inpatient medical expenditure. Our findings undermine a key justification to advocate PHI uptake among the population, with a need for the Malaysian government to reassess the role of PHI in healthcare financing and reconsider PHI subsidization policy. Regulations should also be strengthened to enhance the financial risk protection provided by PHI.

The Australian health system is characterised by high quality care by international standards, produced by a mix of public and private provision and funding of healthcare services. Despite good overall results, three issues are of concern. The first issue relates to the public procurement of healthcare, whose flaws have impacted individuals\' access to care, and the high out-of-pocket spending. The second issue concerns the sustainability of the private health insurance market, given the government\'s goal of relieving cost and capacity from the public scheme, incentivising participation. Third, there are existing inefficiencies and inequities related to the duplication resulting from the interaction between public and private schemes. To ensure a sustainable, efficient and equitable health system, structural reforms are necessary to achieve long-term performance improvements. Using a framework for mixed public-private health systems, we assess the extent to which the Australian healthcare system achieves preconditions for efficiency and affordability in competitive healthcare markets.