Monitoring progress towards universal health coverage in Europe: a descriptive analysis of financial protection in 40 countries.

Background: Ensuring that access to health care is affordable for everyone-financial protection-is central to universal health coverage (UHC). Financial protection is commonly measured using indicators of financial barriers to access (unmet need for health care) and financial hardship caused by out-of-pocket payments for health care (impoverishing and catastrophic health spending). We aim to assess financial hardship and unmet need in Europe and identify the coverage policy choices that undermine financial protection. Methods: We carry out a cross-sectional study of financial hardship in 40 countries in Europe in 2019 (the latest available year of data before COVID-19) using microdata from national household budget surveys. We define impoverishing health spending as out-of-pocket payments that push households below or further below a relative poverty line and catastrophic health spending as out-of-pocket payments that exceed 40% of a household's capacity to pay for health care. We link these results to survey data on unmet need for health care, dental care, and prescribed medicines and information on two aspects of coverage policy at country level: the main basis for entitlement to publicly financed health care and user charges for covered services. Findings: Out-of-pocket payments for health care lead to financial hardship and unmet need in every country in the study, particularly for people with low incomes. Impoverishing health spending ranges from under 1% of households (in six countries) to 12%, with a median of 3%. Catastrophic health spending ranges from under 1% of households (in two countries) to 20%, with a median of 6%. Catastrophic health spending is consistently concentrated in the poorest fifth of the population and is largely driven by out-of-pocket payments for outpatient medicines, medical products, and dental care-all forms of treatment that should be an essential part of primary care. The median incidence of catastrophic health spending is three times lower in countries that cover over 99% of the population than in countries that cover less than 99%. In 16 out of the 17 countries that cover less than 99% of the population, the basis for entitlement is payment of contributions to a social health insurance (SHI) scheme. Countries that give greater protection from user charges to people with low incomes have lower levels of catastrophic health spending. Interpretation: It is challenging to identify with certainty the coverage policy choices that undermine financial protection due to the complexity of the policies involved and the difficulty of disentangling the effects of different choices. The conclusions we draw are therefore tentative, though plausible. Countries are more likely to move towards UHC if they reduce out-of-pocket payments in a progressive way, decreasing them for people with low incomes first. Coverage policy choices that seem likely to achieve this include de-linking entitlement from payment of SHI contributions; expanding the coverage of outpatient medicines, medical products, and dental care; limiting user charges; and strengthening protection against user charges, particularly for people with low incomes. Funding: The European Union (DG SANTE and DG NEAR) and the Government of the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, Spain.

Early health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Mediterranean countries: A tale of successes and challenges.

This paper conducts a comparative review of the (curative) health systems' response taken by Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, these Mediterranean countries shared similarities in terms of health system resources, which were low compared to the EU/OECD average. We distill key policy insights regarding the governance tools adopted to manage the pandemic, the means to secure sufficient physical infrastructure and workforce capacity and some financing and coverage aspects. We performed a qualitative analysis of the evidence reported to the 'Health System Response Monitor' platform of the European Observatory by country experts. We found that governance in the early stages of the pandemic was undertaken centrally in all the Mediterranean countries, even in Italy and Spain where regional authorities usually have autonomy over health matters. Stretched public resources prompted countries to deploy "flexible" intensive care unit capacity and health workforce resources as agile solutions. The private sector was also utilized to expand resources and health workforce capacity, through special public-private partnerships. Countries ensured universal coverage for COVID-19-related services, even for groups not usually entitled to free publicly financed health care, such as undocumented migrants. We conclude that flexibility, speed and adaptive management in health policy responses were key to responding to immediate needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Financial barriers to accessing care as well as potentially higher mortality rates were avoided in most of the countries during the first wave. Yet it is still early to assess to what extent countries were able to maintain essential services without undermining equitable access to high quality care.

Health system performance assessment: a primer for policy-makers

This policy brief is one of a new series to meet the needs of policy-makers and health system managers. The aim is to develop key messages to support evidence-informed policy-making and the editors will continue to strengthen the series by working with authors to improve the consideration given to policy options and implementation.

Norway: Health System Review.

This analysis of the Norwegian health system reviews recent developments in organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. Norway is among the wealthiest nations in the world, with low levels of income inequality. Norwegians enjoy long and healthy lives, with substantial improvement made due to effective and high-quality medical care and the impact of broader public health policies. However, this comes at a high cost, as the Norwegian health system is among the most expensive in Europe, with most financing coming from public funds. Yet there are several areas requiring substantial co-payments, such as adult dental care, outpatient pharmaceuticals, and institutional care for older or disabled people. Recent and ongoing reforms have focused on aligning provision of care to changing population health needs, including adapting medical education, strengthening primary care and improving coordination between primary and specialist care sectors. There has been an increasing use of e-health solutions, and information and communication technologies. Improvements in measuring performance and a more effective use of indicators is expected to play a larger role in informing policy and planning of health services.

Norway's Healthcare Communities are set up to build bridges between hospitals and primary care

In 2012, the Coordination Reform was introduced inNorway to improve coordination between municipalities that organise primary care and the central government that organises specialised care. In 2020, a local governance reform is being implemented, and some municipalities and regions are being merged into larger entities. “Healthcare Communities”, a new partnership between hospitals and their surrounding municipalities, are being established to improve planning and development of services, as well as contribute to national planning. However, improving coordination between primary and specialist services may prove challenging, notably due to the way in which they are governed.

Norway: health system review

This analysis of the Norwegian health system reviews recent developments in organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. Norway is among the wealthiestnations in the world, with low levels of income inequality. Norwegians enjoy long and healthy lives, with substantial improvement made due to effective and high-quality medical care and the impact of broader public health policies. However, this comes at a high cost, as the Norwegian health system is among the most expensive in Europe, with most financing coming from public funds. Yet there are several areas requiring substantial co-payments, such as adult dental care, outpatient pharmaceuticals, and institutional care for older or disabled people. Recent and ongoing reforms have focused on aligning provision of care to changing population health needs, including adapting medical education,strengthening primary care and improving coordination between primary and specialist care sectors. There has been an increasing use of e-health solutions, and information and communication technologies. Improvementsin measuring performance and a more effective use of indicators is expected to play a larger role in informing policy and planning of health services.

Finland: Health System Review.

This analysis of the Finnish health system reviews developments in its organization and governance, financing, provision of services, health reforms and health system performance. Finland is a welfare state witha high standard of social and living conditions and a low poverty rate. Its health system has a highly decentralized administration, multiple funding sources, and three provision channels for statutory services in first-contact care: the municipal system, the national health insurance system, and occupational health care. The core health system is organized by the municipalities (i.e. local authorities) which are responsible for financing primary and specialized care. Health financing arrangements are fragmented, with municipalities, the health insurance system, employers and households all contributing substantial shares. The health system performs relatively well, as health services are fairly effective, but accessibility may be an issue due to long waiting times and relatively high levels of cost sharing. For over a decade, there has been broad agreement on the need to reform the Finnish health system, but reaching a feasible policy consensus has been challenging.

Finland: health system review

This analysis of the Finnish health system reviews developments in its organization and governance, financing, provision of services, health reforms and health system performance. Finland is a welfare state with a high standard of social and living conditions and a low poverty rate. Its health system has a highly decentralized administration, multiple funding sources, and three provision channels for statutory services in first-contact care: the municipal system, the national health insurance system, and occupational health care. The core health system is organized by the municipalities (i.e. local authorities) which are responsible for financing primary and specialized care. Health financing arrangements are fragmented, with municipalities, the health insurance system, employers and households all contributing substantial shares. The health system performs relatively well, as health services are fairly effective, but accessibility may be an issue due to long waiting times and relatively high levels of cost sharing. For over a decade, there has been broad agreement on the need to reform the Finnish health system, but reaching a feasiblepolicy consensus has been challenging.

Towards an understanding of resilience: responding to health systems shocks.

The recent outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in West Africa has drawn attention to the role and responsiveness of health systems in the face of shock. It brought into sharp focus the idea that health systems need not only to be stronger but also more 'resilient'. In this article, we argue that responding to shocks is an important aspect of resilience, examining the health system behaviour in the face of four types of contemporary shocks: the financial crisis in Europe from 2008 onwards; climate change disasters; the EVD outbreak in West Africa 2013-16; and the recent refugee and migration crisis in Europe. Based on this analysis, we identify '3 plus 2' critical dimensions of particular relevance to health systems' ability to adapt and respond to shocks; actions in all of these will determine the extent to which a response is successful. These are three core dimensions corresponding to three health systems functions: 'health information systems' (having the information and the knowledge to make a decision on what needs to be done); 'funding/financing mechanisms' (investing or mobilising resources to fund a response); and 'health workforce' (who should plan and implement it and how). These intersect with two cross-cutting aspects: 'governance', as a fundamental function affecting all other system dimensions; and predominant 'values' shaping the response, and how it is experienced at individual and community levels. Moreover, across the crises examined here, integration within the health system contributed to resilience, as does connecting with local communities, evidenced by successful community responses to Ebola and social movements responding to the financial crisis. In all crises, inequalities grew, yet our evidence also highlights that the impact of shocks is amenable to government action. All these factors are shaped by context. We argue that the '3 plus 2' dimensions can inform pragmatic policies seeking to increase health systems resilience.

The epidemiological transition in Eastern and Western Europe: a historic natural experiment.

Background: The continent of Europe has experienced remarkable changes in the past 25 years, providing scope for natural experiments that offer insight into the complex determinants of health. Methods: We analysed trends in life expectancy at birth in three parts of Europe, those countries that were members of the European Union (EU) prior to 2004, countries that joined the European Union since then, and the twelve countries that emerged from the Soviet Union to form the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The contribution of deaths at different ages to these changes was assessed using Arriaga's method of decomposing changes in life expectancy. Results: Europe remains divided geographically, with an East-West gradient. The former Soviet countries experienced a marked initial decline in life expectancy and have only recovered after 2005. However, the situation for those of working ages is little better than in 1990. The pre-2004 EU has seen substantial gains throughout the past 25 years, although there is some evidence that this may be slowing, or even reversing, at older ages. The countries joining the EU in 2004 subsequently began to see some improvements in the early 1990s, but have experienced larger gains since 2000. Conclusions: Europe offers a valuable natural laboratory for understanding the impact of political, economic, and social changes on health. While the historic divisions of Europe are still visible, there is also evidence that individual countries are doing better or worse than their neighbours, providing many lessons that can be learned from.

Austerity and health: the impact in the UK and Europe.

Austerity measures-reducing social spending and increasing taxation-hurts deprived groups the most. Less is known about the impact on health. In this short review, we evaluate the evidence of austerity's impact on health, through two main mechanisms: a 'social risk effect' of increasing unemployment, poverty, homelessness and other socio-economic risk factors (indirect), and a 'healthcare effect' through cuts to healthcare services, as well as reductions in health coverage and restricting access to care (direct). We distinguish those impacts of economic crises from those of austerity as a response to it. Where possible, data from across Europe will be drawn upon, as well as more extensive analysis of the UK's austerity measures performed by the authors of this review.

The role of the European Structural and Investment Funds in Financing Health System in Lithuania: Experience from 2007 to 2013 funding period and implications for the future.

European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) are a major source of investments in the newer EU member states. In Lithuania's health sector, the amount for the 2007-2013 funding period reached more than €400 million. In this paper we aim to (i) identify the key areas in the health sector which were supported by ESIF, (ii) determine the extent to which ESIF assisted the implementation of the ongoing health system reform; and (iii) assess whether the use of funds has led to expected improvements in healthcare. We review the national strategic documents and legislation, and perform calculations to determine funding allocations by specific area, based on the available data. We analyse changes according to a set of selected indicators. We find that implementation of programmes funded by the ESIF lacks formal evaluation. Existing evidence suggests that some improvement has been achieved by 2013. However, there are persisting challenges, including failure to reach a broad agreement on selection of health and healthcare indicators, lack of transparency in allocations, and absence of coherent assessment measures of healthcare quality and accessibility.

Greece: Health System Review.

This analysis of the Greek health system reviews developments in its organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. The economic crisis has had a major impact on Greek society and the health system. Health status indicators such as life expectancy at birth and at age sixtyfive are above the average in the European Union but health inequalities and particular risk factors such as high smoking rates and child obesity persist. The highly centralized health system is a mixed model incorporating both tax-based financing and social health insurance. Historically, a number of enduring structural and operational inadequacies within the health system required addressing, but reform attempts often failed outright or stagnated at the implementation phase. The countrys Economic Adjustment Programme has acted as a catalyst to tackle a large number of wide-ranging reforms in the health sector, aiming not only to reduce public sector spending but also to rectify inequities and inefficiencies. Since 2010, these reforms have included the establishment of a single purchaser for the National Health System, standardizing the benefits package, re-establishing universal coverage and access to health care, significantly reducing pharmaceutical expenditure through demand and supply-side measures, and important changes to procurement and hospital payment systems; all these measures have been undertaken in a context of severe fiscal constraints. A major overhaul of the primary care system is the priority in the period 2018-2021. Several other challenges remain, such as ensuring adequate funding for the health system (and reducing the high levels of out-of-pocket spending on health); maintaining universal health coverage and access to needed health services; and strengthening health system planning, coordination and governance. While the preponderance of reforms implemented so far have focused on reducing costs, there is a need to develop this focus into longer-term strategic reforms that enhance efficiency while guaranteeing the delivery of health services and improving the overall quality of care.