Improving hospital nurse staffing during the pandemic: Implementation of the 2019 Fund for Health Care Staff in Belgium.

Chronic hospital nurse understaffing is a pre-existing condition of the COVID-19 pandemic. With nurses on the frontline against the pandemic, safe nurse staffing in hospitals is high on the political agenda of the responsible ministers of Health. This paper presents a recent Belgian policy reform to improve nurse staffing levels. Although the reform was initiated before the pandemic, its roll-out took place from 2020 onwards. Through a substantial increase of the hospital budget, policy makers envisaged to improve patient-to-nurse ratios. Yet, this ambition was considerably toned down during the implementation. Due to a shortage of nurses in the labour market, hospital associations successfully lobbied to allocate part of the budget to hire non-nursing staff. Moreover, other healthcare settings claimed their share of the pie. Elements of international best-practice examples such as ward managers supernumerary to the team and increasing the transparency on staffing decisions were adopted. Other measures, such as mandated patient-to-nurse ratios, nurse staffing committees, or the monitoring or public reporting of ratios, were not retained. Additional measures were taken to safeguard that bedside staffing levels would improve, such as the requirement to demonstrate a net increase in staff to obtain additional budget, staffing plan's approval by local work councils and recommendation to base staff allocation on patient acuity measures. This policy process makes clear that the engagement of budgets is only a first step towards safe staffing levels, which needs to be embedded in a comprehensive policy plan. Future evaluation of bedside nurse staffing levels and nurse wellbeing is needed to conclude about the effectiveness of these measures and the intended and unintended effects they provoked.

Can people afford to pay for health care? New evidence on financial protection in Belgium

This review is part of a series of country-based studies generating new evidence on financial protection in European health systems. Financial protection is central to universal health coverage and a core dimension of health system performance. The incidence of catastrophic health spending is higher in Belgium than in most other countries in western Europe. It is heavily concentrated in the poorest fifth of the population and among households headed by unemployed or inactive people. Rates of unmet need for health care and dental care in Belgium are similar to the European Union average, but there is a significant gap in unmet need between the richest and poorest people. The factors that undermine financial protection in Belgium include gaps in all three dimensions of health coverage (population coverage, service coverage and user charges) and administrative barriers. At least 1% of the population is uninsured, rising to at least 2% in the Brussels region and among younger adults and self-employed people. On average, catastrophic spending is driven by out-of-pocket payments for medical products (owing to gaps in the benefits package) and inpatient care (reflecting widespread balance billing). In the poorest consumption quintile, however, it is mainly driven by outpatient medicines, diagnostic tests and outpatient care. The Government has recently taken steps to strengthen financial protection, but more can be done to simplify Belgium’s unusually complex coverage policy and reduce co-payments and other out-of-pocket payments, particularly for low-income households – for example, abolishing retrospective reimbursement for all health services; extending the annual cap on co-payments to all health services and lowering it for people with very low incomes; granting automatic entitlement to everyone eligible for increased reimbursement (reduced co-payments); limiting balance billing in outpatient and inpatient care; and strengthening regulation of the price of non-covered medical products.

Economies of scale and optimal size of maternity services in Belgium: A Data Envelopment Analysis.

This article uses a Data Envelopment Analysis to measure scale efficiency of maternity services in Belgium and estimate the minimum efficient scale in this context. Using administrative data for all maternity services in Belgium in 2016, the minimum efficient scale is estimated at 557 deliveries per year, which is above the currently prevailing norm of 400 deliveries per year. In particular, the closure of 17 small maternity services could improve efficiency without reducing accessibility. In addition to that, further efficiency gains could be attained by increasing the scale of maternity services up to at least 900 deliveries per year. Although most services are close to scale efficiency, the mean scale inefficiency level is 13% and low scores are mainly concentrated among the smallest services. These results are robust to changes in model specifications, bootstrapping and removal of outliers. In the current context of reform of the hospital and maternity landscape in Belgium, this study shows room for improvement and the possibility to generate substantial efficiency gains that could be reinvested in the healthcare system.

The financial impact of SBRT for oligometastatic disease: A population-level analysis in Belgium.

INTRODUCTION: There is a steady rise in Stereotactic Body RadioTherapy (SBRT) utilization in oligometastatic disease (OMD). This may generate important financial consequences for radiotherapy budgets. The National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance of Belgium (NIHDI) initiated a coverage with evidence development (CED) project for innovative radiotherapy, including SBRT, in 2011. A cost calculation and budget estimation for SBRT in the OMD setting was carried out. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Predictive growth scenarios for future uptake of SBRT for OMD in Belgium were developed using demographics and CED data. The provider cost of SBRT for OMD in Belgium was calculated using the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TD-ABC) model developed by ESTRO-HERO, alimented with national data on resources, treatments and operational parameters, and compared to the new reimbursement. Combining these, the future financial impact of this novel treatment indication for healthcare providers and payers in Belgium was evaluated. RESULTS: The number of 428 OMDs treated with SBRT in Belgium in 2017 is expected to increase between 484 and 2073 courses annually by 2025. A provider cost of €4360 per SBRT was calculated (range: €3488-€5654), whereas the reimbursement covers between €4139 and €4654. Large variations in potential extra provider costs by 2025 ensue from the different scenarios, ranging between €1,765,993 and €9,038,754. Provider costs and reimbursement show good agreement. CONCLUSION: Although the financial impact of SBRT for OMD in Belgium is forecasted to remain acceptable, even in extreme scenarios, further clinical trials and real-life clinical and financial monitoring with prospective data gathering are necessary to refine the data.

Trends in the utilisation rates and acute hospital capacity needs for total hip replacements: results of an analysis of administrative data.

Total hip replacement surgery is the mainstay of treatment for end-stage hip arthritis. In 2014, there were 28227 procedures (incidence rate 252/100000 population). Using administrative data, we projected the future volume of total hip replacement procedures and incidence rates using two models. The constant rate model fixes utilisation rates at 2014 levels and adjusts for demographic changes. Projections indicate 32248 admissions by 2025 or an annual growth of 1.22% (incidence rate 273). The time trend model additionally projects the evolution in age-specific utilisation rates. 34895 admissions are projected by 2025 or an annual growth of 1.95% (incidence rate 296). The projections show a shift in performing procedures at younger age. Forecasts of length of stay indicate a substantial shortening. By 2025, the required number of hospital beds will be halved. Despite more procedures, capacity can be reduced, leading to organisational change (e.g. elective orthopaedic clinics) and more labour intensive stays.

The introduction of hospital networks in Belgium: The path from policy statements to the 2019 legislation.

In April 2015, the Belgian Federal Minister for Social Affairs and Public Health launched an Action Plan to reform the hospital landscape. With the creation of "localregional clinical hospital networks" with their own governance structures, the plan follows the international trend towards hospital consolidation and collaboration. The major complicating factors in the Belgian context are (1) that policy instruments for the redesign of the hospital service delivery system are divided between the federal government and the federated authorities, which can result in an asymmetric hospital landscape with a potentially better distribution of clinical services in the Flanders hospital collaborations than in the other federated entities; and (2) the current regulations stipulate that only hospitals (and not networks) are entitled to hospital budgets. Although the reform is the most significant and drastic transformation of the Belgian hospital sector in the last three decades, networks mainly offer a framework in which hospitals can collaborate. More regulation and policy measures are needed to enhance collaboration and distribution of clinical services.

Varying viewpoints of Belgian stakeholders on models of interhospital collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals are increasingly parts of larger care collaborations, rather than individual entities. Organizing and operating these collaborations is challenging; a significant number do not succeed, as it is difficult to align the goals of the partners. However, little research has focused on stakeholders' views regarding hospital collaboration models or on whether these views are aligned with those of hospital management. This study explores Belgian hospital stakeholders' views on the factors affecting hospital collaborations and their perspectives on different models for Belgian interhospital collaboration. METHODS: Qualitative focus group study on the viewpoints, barriers, and facilitators associated with hospital collaboration models (health system, network, joint venture). RESULTS: A total of 55 hospital stakeholders (hospital managers, chairs of medical councils, chair of hospital boards and special interest groups) participated in seven focus group sessions. Collaboration in health care is challenging, as the goals of the different stakeholder groups are partly parallel but also sometimes conflicting. Hospital managers and special interest groups favored health systems as the most integrated form. Hospital board members also opted for this model, but believed a coordinated network to be the most pragmatic and feasible model at the moment. Members of physicians' organizations preferred the joint venture, as it creates more flexibility for physicians. Successful collaboration requires trust and commitment. Legislation must provide a supporting framework and governance models. CONCLUSIONS: Involvement of all stakeholder groups in the process of decision-making within the collaboration is perceived as a necessity, which confirms the importance of the stakeholders' theory. The health system is the collaboration structure best suited to enhancing task distribution and improving patient quality. However, the existence of networks and joint ventures is considered necessary in the process of transformation towards more solid hospital collaborations such as health systems.

Fairness in cost-benefit analysis: A methodology for health technology assessment.

We evaluate the introduction of various forms of antihypertensive treatments in France with a distribution-sensitive cost-benefit analysis. Compared to traditional cost-benefit analysis, we implement distributional weighting based on equivalent incomes, a new concept of individual well-being that does respect individual preferences but is not subjectively welfarist. Individual preferences are estimated on the basis of a contingent valuation question, introduced into a representative survey of the French population. Compared to traditional cost-effectiveness analysis in health technology assessment, we show that it is feasible to go beyond a narrow evaluation of health outcomes while still fully exploiting the sophistication of medical information. Sensitivity analysis illustrates the relevancy of this richer welfare framework, the importance of the distinction between an ex ante and an ex post approach, and the need to consider distributional effects in a broader institutional setting.

Variability in elective day-surgery rates between Belgian hospitals - Analyses of administrative data explained by surgical experts.

BACKGROUND: In the last decades, day surgery has steadily and significantly grown in many countries, yet the increase has been uneven. There are large variations in day-surgery activity between countries, but also within countries between hospitals and surgeons. This paper explores the variability in day-care activity for elective surgical procedures between Belgian hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The administrative hospital data of all patients formally admitted in a Belgian hospital for inpatient or day-care surgery between 2011 and 2013 were analysed and summarized in graphs. During 11 expert meetings with ad-hoc surgical expert groups the variability in day-surgery share between hospitals was discussed in depth. RESULTS: The variability in day-care share between Belgian hospitals is considerable. For 37 out of 486 elective surgical procedures, the variability ranged between 0 and 100%. High national day-care rates do not preclude room for improvement for certain hospitals as for the majority of these procedures there are "low performers". According to the consulted clinical experts, the high variability in day-care share may for the greater part be explained by medical team related factors, customs and traditions, the lack of clinical guidelines, financial factors, organisational factors and patient related factors. CONCLUSION: If a further expansion of day surgery is envisaged in Belgium the factors that contribute to the current variability in day-surgery rates between hospitals should be addressed. In addition, a feedback system in which hospitals and health care providers have the figures on their percentage of procedures carried out in day surgery compared to other hospitals and care providers (benchmarking) and the monitoring of a number of quality indicators (e.g. unplanned readmission, unplanned inpatient stay, emergency department visit) should be installed.

Out-of-Pocket Payments and Subjective Unmet Need of Healthcare.

We present a critical review of the literature that discusses the link between the level of out-of-pocket payments in developed countries and the share of people in these countries reporting that they postpone or forgo healthcare for financial reasons. We discuss the pros and cons of measuring access problems with this subjective variable. Whereas the quantitative findings in terms of numbers of people postponing care must be interpreted with utmost caution, the picture for the vulnerable groups in society is reasonably robust and unsurprising: people with low incomes and high morbidity and incomplete (or non-existent) insurance coverage are most likely to postpone or forgo healthcare for financial reasons. It is more surprising that people with high incomes and generous insurance coverage also report that they postpone care. We focus on some policy-relevant issues that call for further research: the subtle interactions between financial and non-financial factors, the possibility of differentiation of out-of-pocket payments between patients and between healthcare services, and the normative debate around accessibility and affordability.

The Belgian Health System Performance Report 2012: snapshot of results and recommendations to policy makers.

Following the commitments of the Tallinn Charter, Belgium publishes the second report on the performance of its health system. A set of 74 measurable indicators is analysed, and results are interpreted following the five dimensions of the conceptual framework: accessibility, quality of care, efficiency, sustainability and equity. All domains of care are covered (preventive, curative, long-term and end-of-life care), as well as health status and health promotion. For all indicators, national/regional values are presented with their evolution over time. Benchmarking to results of other EU-15 countries is also systematic. The policy recommendations represent the most important output of the report.

Statutory health insurance competition in Europe: a four-country comparison.

This paper explores the goals and implementation of reforms introducing choice of and competition among insurers providing statutory health coverage in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland. In theory, health insurance competition can enhance efficiency in health care administration and delivery only if people have free choice of insurer (consumer mobility), if insurers do not have incentives to select risks, and if insurers are able to influence health service quality and costs. In practice, reforms in the four countries have not always prioritised efficiency and implementation has varied. Differences in policy goals explain some but not all of the differences in implementation. Despite significant investment in risk adjustment, incentives for risk selection remain and consumer mobility is not evenly distributed across the population. Better risk adjustment might make it easier for older and less healthy people to change insurer. Policy makers could also do more to prevent insurers from linking the sale of statutory and voluntary health insurance, particularly where take-up of voluntary coverage is widespread. Collective negotiation between insurers and providers in Belgium, Germany and Switzerland curbs insurers' ability to influence health care quality and costs. Nevertheless, while insurers in the Netherlands have good access to efficiency-enhancing tools, data and capacity constraints and resistance from stakeholders limit the extent to which tools are used. The experience of these countries offers an important lesson to other countries: it is not straightforward to put in place the conditions under which health insurance competition can enhance efficiency. Policy makers should not, therefore, underestimate the challenges involved.

Patient socioeconomic determinants of the choice of generic versus brand name drugs in the context of a reference price system: evidence from Belgian prescription data.

The generic reference price system (RPS) can impose a financial penalty for patients using a brand name drug instead of its generic alternative. Previous studies on the impact of the RPS have not considered the potentially differential effect of using generic alternatives for individuals with a different socioeconomic background. However, patients' characteristics might determine their overall knowledge of the existence of the system and thus of the financial burden to which they may be confronted. The association between patients' characteristics and the use of generic drugs versus brand name drugs was analyzed for ten highly prescribed pharmaceutical molecules included in the Belgian generic reference price system. Prescriptions were obtained from a 10% sample of all general practitioners in 2008 (corresponding to 120,670 adult patients and 368,101 prescriptions). For each pharmaceutical molecule, logistic regression models were performed, with independent variables for patient socioeconomic background at the individual level (work status, having a guaranteed income and being entitled to increased reimbursement of co-payments) and at the level of the neighborhood (education). The percentage of generic prescriptions ranged from 24.7 to 76.4%, and the mean reference supplement in 2008 ranged from €4.3 to €37.8. For seven molecules, higher use of a generic alternative was associated with either having a guaranteed income, with receiving increased reimbursement of co-payments or with living in areas with the lowest levels of education. Globally, results provided evidence that the generic RPS in Belgium does not lead to a higher financial burden on individuals from a low socioeconomic background.

Patient socioeconomic determinants for the choice of the cheapest molecule within a cluster: evidence from Belgian prescription data.

Reference pricing is a common cost-sharing mechanism, with the financial penalty for the use of costly drugs shifted from the third-party payer to the patient. Unintended distributional consequences might arise, if the weakest socioeconomic groups face a relatively higher financial burden. This study analyzed for a sample of Belgian individual prescription data for 4 clusters of commonly used drugs (proton pump inhibitors, statins and two groups of antihypertensives [drugs acting on renin-angiotensin system and dihydropyridine derivatives]) whether the probability to receive the least expensive molecule within a cluster was linked to the socioeconomic status of the patient. Logistic regression models included individual demographic, working, chronic illness and financial status and small area education data for 906,543 prescriptions from 1,280 prescribing general practitioners and specialists. For the 4 clusters, results show that patients with lower socioeconomic status consistently use slightly more the least expensive drugs than other patients. Larger effects are observed for patients residing in a nursing home for the elderly, patients entitled to increased reimbursement of co-payments, unemployed, patients treated in a primary care center financed per capita (and not fee-for-service) and patients having a chronic illness. Also, patients residing in neighborhoods with low education status use more less expensive drugs. The findings of the study suggest that although equity considerations were not explicitly taken into account in the design of the reference price system, there is no real equity problem, as the costly drugs with supplement are not prescribed more often in patients from lower socioeconomic classes.

Supplemental health insurance and equality of access in Belgium.

The effects of supplemental health insurance on health-care consumption crucially depend on specific institutional features of the health-care system. We analyse the situation in Belgium, a country with a very broad coverage in compulsory social health insurance and where supplemental insurance mainly refers to extra-billing in hospitals. Within this institutional background, we find only weak evidence of adverse selection in the coverage of supplemental health insurance. We find much stronger effects of socio-economic background. We estimate a bivariate probit model and cannot reject the assumption of exogeneity of insurance availability for the explanation of health-care use. A count model for hospital care shows that supplemental insurance has no significant effect on the number of spells, but a negative effect on the number of nights per spell. We comment on the implications of our findings for equality of access to health care in Belgium.

Hospital supplements in Belgium: price variation and regulation.

OBJECTIVES: Although there is a comprehensive public health insurance system in Belgium, out-of-pocket expenditures can be very high, mainly for inpatients. While a large part of the official price is reimbursed, patients are confronted with increased extra billing (supplements). Therefore, the government imposed various restrictions on the amount of supplements to be charged, related to the type of room and the patient's insurance status. We investigate how prices are set and whether the restrictions have been effective. METHODS: We use an administrative dataset of the Belgian sickness funds for the year 2003 with billing data per hospitalisation and hospital characteristics. Boxplots describe the distribution of several categories of supplements. OLS is used to explore the relationship between hospital characteristics and extra billing. RESULTS: There is a large and intransparent variation in extra billing practices among different hospitals. Given the room type, supplements per day are smaller for patients qualifying for protection, confirming that the regulation is applied quite well. However, because of their longer length of stay this does not result in lower supplements per stay for these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Currently the price setting behavior of providers lacks transparency. Protective regulation could be refined by taking into account the longer length of stay of vulnerable groups.

Risk adjustment and risk selection in Europe: 6 years later.

In this paper we analyse the developments concerning risk adjustment and risk selection in Belgium, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands and Switzerland in the period 2000-2006. Since 2000 two major trends can be observed. On the one hand the risk adjustment systems have been improved, for example, by adding relevant health-based risk adjusters. On the other hand in all five countries there is evidence of increasing risk selection, which increasingly becomes a problem, in particular in Germany and Switzerland. Some potential explanations are given for these seemingly contradictory observations. Since the mid-1990s citizens in these countries can regularly switch sickness fund, which should stimulate the sickness funds to improve efficiency in health care production and to respond to consumers' preferences. When looking at managed care there are some weak signals of increasing managed care activities by individual sickness funds in all countries (except Belgium). However, with imperfect risk adjustment, such as in Israel and Switzerland, insurers will integrate their managed care activities with their selection activities, which may have adverse effects for society, even if all insurers are equally successful in selection. The conclusion is that good risk adjustment is an essential pre-condition for reaping the benefits of a competitive health insurance market. Without good risk adjustment the disadvantages of a competitive insurance market may outweigh its advantages.

Supplementary health insurance as a tool for risk-selection in mandatory basic health insurance markets.

As the share of supplementary health insurance (SI) in health care finance is likely to grow, SI may become an increasingly attractive tool for risk-selection in basic health insurance (BI). In this paper, we develop a conceptual framework to assess the probability that insurers will use SI for favourable risk-selection in BI. We apply our framework to five countries in which risk-selection via SI is feasible: Belgium, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. For each country, we review the available evidence of SI being used as selection device. We find that the probability that SI is and will be used for risk-selection substantially varies across countries. Finally, we discuss several strategies for policy makers to reduce the chance that SI will be used for risk-selection in BI markets.

Health care reform in Belgium.

Curbing the growth of public sector health expenditures has been the proclaimed government objective in Belgium since the 1980s. However, the respect for freedom of choice for patients and for therapeutic freedom for providers has blocked the introduction of microeconomic incentives and quality control. Therefore--with some exceptions, particularly in the hospital sector--policy has consisted mainly of tariff and supply restrictions and increases in co-payments. These measures have not been successful in curbing the growth of expenditures. Moreover, there remains a large variation in medical practices. While the structure of health financing is relatively progressive from an international perspective, socioeconomic and regional inequalities in health persist. The most important challenge is the restructuring of the basic decision-making processes; i.e. a simplification of the bureaucratic procedures and a re-examination of the role of regional authorities and sickness funds.

Risk selection and the specification of the conventional risk adjustment formula.

We argue that a sharp distinction must be made between the empirical problem of finding the best equation for explaining medical expenditures and the normative question of deriving capitations which give health plans the appropriate incentives. We propose a procedure, taken from the social choice literature, to go from the estimated equations to the capitations. If the estimated equations are not additively separable in legitimate and illegitimate risk-adjusters, it is impossible to remove all incentives for risk selection while respecting at the same time a straightforward requirement of horizontal equity. This has immediate implications for the choice of the functional form. Moreover, in so far as the conventional risk adjustment literature only includes so-called "legitimate" risk-adjusters in the estimations, its results may suffer from omitted variables-bias. We illustrate our general methodological points with empirical results, obtained from a cross-section of 321,111 Belgian patients.