Transformations in the landscape of primary health care during COVID-19: Themes from the European region.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted primary health care (PHC) across Europe. Since March 2020, the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) has documented country-level responses using a structured template distributed to country experts. We extracted all PHC-relevant data from the HSRM and iteratively developed an analysis framework examining the models of PHC delivery employed by PHC providers in response to the pandemic, as well as the government enablers supporting these models. Despite the heterogenous PHC structures and capacities across European countries, we identified three prevalent models of PHC delivery employed: (1) multi-disciplinary primary care teams coordinating with public health to deliver the emergency response and essential services; (2) PHC providers defining and identifying vulnerable populations for medical and social outreach; and (3) PHC providers employing digital solutions for remote triage, consultation, monitoring and prescriptions to avoid unnecessary contact. These were supported by government enablers such as increasing workforce numbers, managing demand through public-facing risk communications, and prioritising pandemic response efforts linked to vulnerable populations and digital solutions. We discuss the importance of PHC systems maintaining and building on these models of PHC delivery to strengthen preparedness for future outbreaks and better respond to the contemporary health challenges.

Pooling financial resources for universal health coverage: options for reform.

Universal health coverage (UHC) means that all people can access health services of good quality without experiencing financial hardship. Three health financing functions - revenue raising, pooling of funds and purchasing health services - are vital for UHC. This article focuses on pooling: the accumulation and management of prepaid financial resources. Pooling creates opportunities for redistribution of resources to support equitable access to needed services and greater financial protection even if additional revenues for UHC cannot be raised. However, in many countries pooling arrangements are very fragmented, which create barriers to redistribution. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of pooling reform options to support countries who are exploring ways to enhance redistribution of funds. We outline four broad types of pooling reforms and discuss their potential and challenges in addressing fragmentation of health financing: (i) shifting to compulsory or automatic coverage for everybody; (ii) merging different pools to increase the number of pool members and the diversity of pool members' health needs and risks; (iii) cross-subsidization of pools that have members with lower revenues and higher health risks; and (iv) harmonization across pools, such as benefits, payment methods and rates. Countries can combine several reform elements. Whether the potential for redistribution is actually realized through a pooling reform also depends on the alignment of the pooling structure with revenue raising and purchasing arrangements. Finally, the scope for reform is constrained by institutional and political feasibility, and the political economy around pooling reforms needs to be anticipated and managed.

La couverture sanitaire universelle (CSU) consiste à ce que l'ensemble de la population ait accès à des services de santé de qualité sans encourir de difficultés financières. Pour cela, trois fonctions de financement de la santé sont essentielles: le recouvrement des recettes, la mise en commun des fonds et l'achat de services de santé. Cet article s'intéresse à la mise en commun, à savoir le recueil et la gestion de ressources financières prépayées. La mise en commun permet de redistribuer les ressources afin d'offrir un accès équitable aux services nécessaires et d'améliorer la protection financière même en cas d'impossibilité de lever des recettes supplémentaires pour la CSU. Or, dans de nombreux pays, les mécanismes de mise en commun sont très fragmentés, ce qui fait obstacle à la redistribution. Cet article entend donner un aperçu des possibilités de réforme en ce qui concerne la mise en commun afin d'aider les pays qui cherchent à améliorer la redistribution des fonds. Nous présentons quatre grands types de réforme concernant la mise en commun et analysons le potentiel ainsi que les difficultés qu'ils présentent pour mettre un terme à la fragmentation du financement de la santé: (i) passage à une couverture obligatoire ou automatique pour tout le monde; (ii) fusion de différentes caisses afin d'augmenter le nombre de membres d'une même caisse ainsi que la diversité de leurs besoins et de leurs risques; (iii) interfinancement des caisses dont les membres ont des revenus faibles et des risques élevés en matière de santé; et (iv) harmonisation entre les caisses concernant, par exemple, les avantages, les modes de paiement et les tarifs. Les pays peuvent combiner plusieurs éléments de réforme. La réalisation du potentiel de redistribution grâce à une réforme de la mise en commun dépend aussi de l'alignement de la structure de mise en commun sur le recouvrement des recettes et les mécanismes d'achat. Enfin, l'étendue de la réforme est limitée par la faisabilité institutionnelle et politique, et l'économie politique relative à cette réforme de la mise en commun doit être anticipée et gérée.

La cobertura sanitaria universal (CSU) significa que todas las personas pueden acceder a servicios de salud de buena calidad sin experimentar dificultades financieras. Hay tres funciones de financiamiento de la salud que son fundamentales para la CSU: la recaudación de ingresos, la mancomunación de fondos y la compra de servicios de salud. Este artículo se centra en la mancomunación: la acumulación y gestión de recursos financieros prepagados. La mancomunación crea oportunidades para la redistribución de recursos que apoyan el acceso equitativo a los servicios necesarios y una mayor protección financiera, incluso si no se pueden recaudar ingresos adicionales para la CSU. Sin embargo, en muchos países los acuerdos de mancomunación están muy fragmentados, lo que crea barreras a la redistribución. El propósito de este artículo es proporcionar una visión general de las opciones de reforma de la mancomunación para apoyar a los países que están explorando formas de mejorar la redistribución de los fondos. Se describen cuatro grandes tipos de reformas de mancomunación y se discuten sus potencialidades y desafíos para abordar la fragmentación del financiamiento de la salud: (i) pasar a una cobertura obligatoria o automática para todos; (ii) fusionar diferentes fondos para aumentar el número de miembros del fondo y la diversidad de las necesidades y riesgos de salud de los miembros del mismo; (iii) subvención cruzada de fondos que tienen miembros con menores ingresos y mayores riesgos para la salud; y (iv) armonización entre los fondos, tales como beneficios, métodos de pago y tarifas. Los países pueden combinar varios elementos de reforma. La realización efectiva del potencial de redistribución mediante una reforma de la mancomunación depende también de la alineación de la estructura de la mancomunación con los acuerdos de recaudación de ingresos y compra. Por último, el alcance de la reforma se ve limitado por la viabilidad institucional y política, y es preciso anticipar y gestionar la economía política en torno a la reforma de la mancomunación.

Comparative financing analysis and political economy of noncommunicable diseases.

The pandemic of chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) poses substantial challenges to the health financing sustainability in high-income and low/middle income countries (LMICs). The aim of this review is to identify the bottle neck inefficiencies in NCDs attributable spending and propose sustainable health financing solutions. The World Health Organization (WHO) introduced the "best buy" concept to scale up the core intervention package against NCDs targeted for LMICs. Population- and individual-based NCD best buy interventions are projected at US$170 billion over 2011-2025. Appropriately designed health financing arrangements can be powerful enablers to scale up the NCD best buys. Rapidly developing emerging nations dominate the landscape of LMICs. Their capability and willingness to invest resources for eradicating NCDs could strengthen WHO outreach efforts in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, much beyond current capacities. There has been a declining trend in international donor aid intended to cope with NCDs over the past decade. There is also a serious misalignment of these resources with the actual needs of recipient countries. Globally, the momentum towards the financing of intersectoral actions is growing, and this presents a cost-effective solution. A budget discrepancy of 10:1 in WHO and multilateral agencies remains in donor aid in favour of communicable diseases compared to NCDs. LMICs are likely to remain a bottleneck of NCDs imposed financing sustainability challenge in the long-run. Catastrophic household health expenditure from out of pocket spending on NCDs could plunge almost 150 million people into poverty worldwide. This epidemiological burden coupled with population ageing presents an exceptionally serious sustainability challenge, even among the richest countries which are members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Strategic and political leadership of WHO and multilateral agencies would likely play essential roles in the struggle that has just begun.

Persistent low adherence to hypertension treatment in Kyrgyzstan: How can we understand the role of drug affordability?

It is well known that cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are a growing cause of mortality and morbidity in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). While hypertension (HTN), a leading risk factor for CVD, can be easily managed with widely available medicines, there is a huge gap in treatment for HTN in many LMIC. One such country is Kyrgyzstan, where HTN is a major public health concern and adherence to medication is low. The reasons for low adherence in Kyrgyzstan are not well understood, but some evidence suggests that HTN medicines may be unaffordable for low-income families, resulting in inequitable access to HTN treatment. With data from the 2010 Kyrgyzstan Integrated Household Survey, we estimate the prevalence and factors associated with adherence to HTN medication in Kyrgyzstan. We then investigate the hypothesis that affordability may be an important factor in adherence to HTN medication. Using the coarsened exact matching approach, we estimate the economic burden faced by households with at least one member with elevated blood pressure (EBP) in Kyrgyzstan and their risk of catastrophic spending on health care. We find that EBP households have significantly higher total expenditure on health, as well as on medicines, and are more likely to experience catastrophic health spending, suggesting that out-of-pocket expenditure for EBP may be prohibitively expensive for the poorest in Kyrgyzstan. Our findings also reveal a high prevalence of self-medication (i.e. purchasing and using medication without a doctor's prescription), and increased expenditure due to self-medication, among those with EBP. Our research suggests that affordability of HTN medicines may be an important factor in low adherence to treatment in Kyrgyzstan. Low affordability may be due partly to the prescription of medicines that are not reimbursable under the national drug benefit plan, but more research is needed to identify solutions to the affordability problem.

From scheme to system: social health insurance funds and the transformation of health financing in Kyrgyzstan and Moldova.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the paper is to bring evidence and lessons from two low- and middle-income countries (LMIs) of the former USSR into the global debate on health financing in poor countries. In particular, we analyze the introduction of social health insurance (SHI) in Kyrgyzstan and Moldova. To some extent, the intent of SHI introduction in these countries was similar to that in LMIs elsewhere: increase prepaid revenues for health and incorporate the entire population into the new system. But the approach taken to universality was different. In particular, the SHI fund in each country was used as the key instrument in a comprehensive reform of the health financing system, with the new revenues from payroll taxation used in an explicitly complementary manner to general budget revenues. From a functional perspective, the reforms in these countries involved not only the introduction of a new source of funds, but also the centralization of pooling, a shift from input- to output-based provider payment methods, specification of a benefit package, and greater autonomy for public sector health care providers. Hence, their reforms were not simply the introduction of an SHI scheme, but rather the use of an SHI fund as an instrument to transform the entire system of health financing. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The study uses administrative and household data to demonstrate the impact of the reforms on regional inequality and household financial burden. FINDINGS: The approach used in these two countries led to improved equity in the geographic distribution of government health spending, improved financial protection, and reduced informal payments. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY: The comprehensive approach taken to reform in these two countries, and particularly the redirection of general budget revenues to the new SHI funds, explain much of the success that was achieved. This experience offers potentially useful lessons for LMIs elsewhere in the world, and for shifting the global debate away from what we see as a false dichotomy between SHI and general revenue-funded systems. By demonstrating that sources are not systems, these cases illustrate how, in particular by careful design of pooling and coverage arrangements, the introduction of SHI in an LMI context can avoid the fragmentation problem often associated with this reform instrument.

Bismarck meets Beveridge on the Silk Road: coordinating funding sources to create a universal health financing system in Kyrgyzstan.

Options for health financing reform are often portrayed as a choice between general taxation (known as the Beveridge model) and social health insurance (known as the Bismarck model). Ten years of health financing reform in Kyrgyzstan, since the introduction of its compulsory health insurance fund in 1997, provide an excellent example of why it is wrong to reduce health financing policy to a choice between the Beveridge and Bismarck models. Rather than fragment the system according to the insurance status of the population, as many other low- and middle-income countries have done, the Kyrgyz reforms were guided by the objective of having a single system for the entire population. Key features include the role and gradual development of the compulsory health insurance fund as the single purchaser of health-care services for the entire population using output-based payment methods, the complete restructuring of pooling arrangements from the former decentralized budgetary structure to a single national pool, and the establishment of an explicit benefit package. Central to the process was the transformation of the role of general budget revenues - the main source of public funding for health - from directly subsidizing the supply of services to subsidizing the purchase of services on behalf of the entire population by redirecting them into the health insurance fund. Through their approach to health financing policy, and pooling in particular, the Kyrgyz health reformers demonstrated that different sources of funds can be used in an explicitly complementary manner to enable the creation of a unified, universal system.

Effectiveness of community health financing in meeting the cost of illness.

How to finance and provide health care for the more than 1.3 billion rural poor and informal sector workers in low- and middle-income countries is one of the greatest challenges facing the international development community. This article presents the main findings from an extensive survey of the literature of community financing arrangements, and selected experiences from the Asia and Africa regions. Most community financing schemes have evolved in the context of severe economic constraints, political instability, and lack of good governance. Micro-level household data analysis indicates that community financing improves access by rural and informal sector workers to needed heath care and provides them with some financial protection against the cost of illness. Macro-level cross-country analysis gives empirical support to the hypothesis that risk-sharing in health financing matters in terms of its impact on both the level and distribution of health, financial fairness and responsiveness indicators. The background research done for this article points to five key policies available to governments to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of existing community financing schemes. This includes: (a) increased and well-targeted subsidies to pay for the premiums of low-income populations; (b) insurance to protect against expenditure fluctuations and re-insurance to enlarge the effective size of small risk pools; (c) effective prevention and case management techniques to limit expenditure fluctuations; (d) technical support to strengthen the management capacity of local schemes; and (e) establishment and strengthening of links with the formal financing and provider networks.