Health Insurance Schemes and Their Influences on Healthcare Variation in Asian Countries: A Realist Review and Theory's Testing in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Various features in health insurance schemes may lead to variation in health care. Unwarranted variations raise concerns about suboptimal quality of care, differing treatments for similar needs, or unnecessary financial burdens on patients and health systems. This realist review aims to explore insurance features that may contribute to health care variation in Asian countries; and to understand influencing mechanisms and contexts. METHODS: We undertook a realist review. First, we developed an initial theory. Second, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature in Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science to produce a middle range theory for Asian countries. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to appraise the methodological quality of included studies. Finally, we tested the theory in Thailand by interviewing nine experts, and further refined the theory. RESULTS: Our systematic search identified 14 empirical studies. We produced a middle range theory in a context-mechanism-outcome configuration (CMOc) which presented seven insurance features: benefit package, cost-sharing policies, beneficiaries, contracted providers, provider payment methods, budget size, and administration and management, that influenced variation through 20 interlinked demand- and supply-side mechanisms. The refined theory for Thailand added eight mechanisms and discarded six mechanisms irrelevant to the local context. CONCLUSION: Our middle range and refined theories provide information about health insurance features associated with health care variation. We encourage policymakers and researchers to test the CMOc in their specific contexts. Appropriately validated, it can help design interventions in health insurance schemes to prevent or mitigate the detrimental effects of unwarranted health care variation.

Governance, policy, and health systems responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand: a qualitative study.

Background: Since 2020, Thailand has experienced four waves of COVID-19. By 31 January 2022, there were 2.4 million cumulative cases and 22,176 deaths nationwide. This study assessed the governance and policy responses adapted to different sizes of the pandemic outbreaks and other challenges. Methods: A qualitative study was applied, including literature reviews and in-depth interviews with 17 multi-sectoral actors purposively identified from those who were responsible for pandemic control and vaccine rollout. We applied deductive approaches using health systems building blocks, and inductive approaches using analysis of in-depth interview content, where key content formed sub-themes, and different sub-themes formed the themes of the study. Findings: Three themes emerged from this study. First, the large scale of COVID-19 infections, especially the Delta strain in 2021, challenged the functioning of the health system's capacity to respond to cases and maintain essential health services. The Bangkok local government insufficiently performed due to its limited capacity, ineffective multi-sectoral collaboration, and high levels of vulnerability in the population. However, adequate financing, universal health coverage, and health workforce professionalism and commitment were key enabling factors that supported the health system. Second, the population's vulnerability exacerbated infection spread, and protracted political conflicts and political interference resulted in the politicization of pandemic control measures and vaccine roll-out; all were key barriers to effective pandemic control. Third, various innovations and adaptive capacities minimized the supply-side gaps, while social capital and civil society engagement boosted community resilience. Conclusion: This study identifies key governance gaps including in public communication, managing infodemics, and inadequate coordination with Bangkok local government, and between public and private sectors on pandemic control and health service provisions. The Bangkok government had limited capacity in light of high levels of population vulnerability. These gaps were widened by political conflicts and interference. Key strengths are universal health coverage with full funding support, and health workforce commitment, innovations, and capacity to adapt interventions to the unfolding emergency. Existing social capital and civil society action increases community resilience and minimizes negative impacts on the population.

Definition, Practice, Regulations, and Effects of Balance Billing: A Scoping Review.

Background: Additional billing is commonly and legally practiced in some countries for patients covered by health insurance. However, knowledge and understanding of the additional billings are limited. This study reviews evidence on additional billing practices including definition, scope of practice, regulations and their effects on insured patients. Methods: A systematic search of the full-text papers that provided the details of balance billing for health services, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2021 was carried out in Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. Articles were screened independently by at least 2 reviewers for eligibility. Thematic analysis was applied. Results: In total, 94 studies were selected for the final analysis. Most of the included articles (83%) reported findings from the United States (US). Numerous terms of additional billings were used across countries such as balance billing, surprise billing, extra billing, supplements and out-of-pocket (OOP) spending. The range of services incurred these additional bills also varied across countries, insurance plans, and healthcare facilities; the frequently reported were emergency services, surgeries, and specialist consultation. There were a few positive though more studies reported negative effects of the substantial additional bills which undermined universal health coverage (UHC) goals by causing financial hardship and reducing access to care. A range of government measures had been applied to mitigate these adverse effects, but some difficulties still exist. Conclusion: Additional billings varied in terms of terminology, definitions, practices, profiles, regulations, and outcomes. There were a set of policy tools aimed to control substantial billing to insured patients despite some limitations and challenges. Governments should apply multiple policy measures to improve financial risk protection to the insured population.