Exploring variation of coverage and access to dental care for adults in 11 European countries: a vignette approach.

BACKGROUND: Oral health, coupled with rising awareness on the impact that limited dental care coverage has on oral health and general health and well-being, has received increased attention over the past few years. The purpose of the study was to compare the statutory coverage and access to dental care for adult services in 11 European countries using a vignette approach. METHODS: We used three patient vignettes to highlight the differences of the dimensions of coverage and access to dental care (coverage, cost-sharing and accessibility). The three vignettes describe typical care pathways for patients with the most common oral health conditions (caries, periodontal disease, edentulism). The vignettes were completed by health services researchers knowledgeable on dental care, dentists, or teams consisting of a health systems expert working together with dental specialists. RESULTS: Completed vignettes were received from 11 countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, France, Germany, Republic of Ireland (Ireland), Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and Sweden. While emergency dental care, tooth extraction and restorative care for acute pain due to carious lesions are covered in most responding countries, root canal treatment, periodontal care and prosthetic restoration often require cost-sharing or are entirely excluded from the benefit basket. Regular dental visits are also limited to one visit per year in many countries. Beyond financial barriers due to out-of-pocket payments, patients may experience very different physical barriers to accessing dental care. The limited availability of contracted dentists (especially in rural areas) and the unequal distribution and lack of specialised dentists are major access barriers to public dental care. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results, statutory coverage of dental care varies across European countries, while access barriers are largely similar. Many dental services require substantial cost-sharing in most countries, leading to high out-of-pocket spending. Socioeconomic status is thus a main determinant for access to dental care, but other factors such as geography, age and comorbidities can also inhibit access and affect outcomes. Moreover, coverage in most oral health systems is targeted at treatment and less at preventative oral health care.

Bulgaria: health system summary

This Health System Summary is based on the Bulgaria: Health System Review (HiT) published in 2018 and relevant reform updates highlighted by the Health Systems and Policies Monitor (HSPM) (www.hspm.org). For this edition, key data have been updated to those available in July 2022 to keep information as current as possible. Health System Summaries use a concise format to communicate central features of country health systems and analyse available evidence on the organization, financing and delivery of health care. They also provide insights into key reforms and the varied challenges testing the performance of the health system.

Bulgaria: Health System Review.

This analysis of the Bulgarian health system reviews developments in its organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. With the 2015 National Health Strategy 2020 at its core, there have been ambitious reform plans to introduce more decentralization, strategic purchasing and integrated care into the Bulgarian social health insurance system. However, the main characteristics of the Bulgarian health system, including a high level of centralization and a single payer to administer social health insurance, remain intact and very few reforms have been implemented (for example, the introduction of health technology assessment). There are multiple reasons for this, of which political fragility and stakeholder resistance are among the most important. Overall, Bulgaria marked notable progress on some health indicators (for example, life expectancy and infant mortality) but generally progress lags behind EU averages. What is more, the system has not been effective in reducing amenable mortality, as reflected in the unsteady improvement patterns in mortality due to malignant neoplasms. This is despite an increase in total health expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product to 8.2% in 2015. The overall high out-of-pocket spending (47.7% of total health spending in 2015) has been growing and is increasingly worrisome. It evidences the low degree of financial protection by the Bulgarian social health insurance system and exacerbates the already considerable inequities along socioeconomic and regional fault lines. For instance, there are regional imbalances of medical professionals, which are more concentrated in urban areas, and accessibility to physicians is further deteriorating, especially in rural areas. Current reforms have to tackle these challenges and build consensus among stakeholders of the health system to unlock the standstill.

Bulgaria: health system review

This analysis of the Bulgarian health system reviews developments in its organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. With the 2015 National Health Strategy 2020 at its core, there have been ambitious reform plans to introduce more decentralization, strategic purchasing and integrated care into the Bulgarian social health insurance system. However, the main characteristics of the Bulgarian health system, including a high level of centralization and a single payer to administer social health insurance, remain intact and very few reforms have been implemented (for example, the introduction of health technology assessment). There are multiple reasons for this, of which political fragility and stakeholder resistance are among the most important. Overall, Bulgaria marked notable progress on some health indicators (for example, life expectancy and infant mortality) but generally progress lags behind EU averages. What is more, the system has not been effective in reducing amenable mortality, as reflected in the unsteady improvement patterns in mortality due to malignant neoplasms. This is despite an increase in total health expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product to 8.2% in 2015. The overall high out-of-pocket spending (47.7% of total health spending in 2015) has been growing and is increasingly worrisome. It evidences the low degree of financial protection by the Bulgarian social health insurance system and exacerbates the already considerable inequities along socioeconomicand regional fault lines. For instance, there are regional imbalances of medical professionals, which are more concentrated in urban areas, and accessibility to physicians is further deteriorating, especially in rural areas. Current reforms have to tackle these challenges and build consensus among stakeholders of the health system to unlock the standstill.

Drug Policy in Bulgaria.

Bulgaria has a mixed public-private health care financing system. Health care is financed mainly from compulsory health insurance contributions and out-of-pocket payments. Out-of-pocket payments constitute a large share of the total health care expenditure (44.14% in 2014). The share of drugs expenditure for outpatient treatment was 42.3% of the total health care expenditure in 2014, covered mainly by private payments (78.6% of the total pharmaceutical expenditure). The drug policy is run by the Ministry of Health (MoH), the National Council on Prices and Reimbursement of Medicinal Products, and the Health Technology Assessment Commission. The MoH defines diseases for which the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) pays for medicines. The National Council on Prices and Reimbursement of Medicinal Products maintains a positive drug list (PDL) and sets drug prices. Health technology assessment was introduced in 2015 for medicinal products belonging to a new international nonproprietary name group. The PDL defines prescription medicines that are paid for by the NHIF, the MoH, and the health care establishments; exact patient co-payments and reimbursement levels; as well as the ceiling prices for drugs not covered by the NHIF, including over-the-counter medicines. The reimbursement level can be 100%, 75%, or up to 50%. The PDL is revised monthly in all cases except for price increase. Physicians are not assigned with pharmaceutical budgets, there is a brand prescribing practice, and the substitution of prescribed medicines by pharmacists is prohibited. Policies toward cost containment and effectiveness increase include introduction of a reference pricing system, obligation to the NHIF to conduct mandatory centralized bargaining of discounts for medicinal products included in the PDL, public tendering for medicines for hospital treatment, reduction of markup margins of wholesalers and retailers, patient co-payment, and the introduction of health technology assessment. Although most of the policies have been introduced since 2011, there is still weak evidence for improvement regarding cost containment and effectiveness.

Preferences of Bulgarian consumers for quality, access and price attributes of healthcare services-result of a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to determine the preferences of Bulgarian citizens regarding the provision of healthcare services. METHOD: A survey was carried out in Bulgaria among a nationally representative sample of 1003 respondents. Both a discrete choice experiment and a self-explicated ranking of outpatient and inpatient service attributes were included in the survey. The data are analyzed to elicit the preferences of Bulgarian healthcare consumers for service attributes and to compare them with previous studies in Bulgaria and other countries in Central and Eastern Europe. RESULTS: The reputation and skills of the care provider appear to be relatively most important to the respondents, followed by the state of the equipment, the condition of the facility and the attitude of the staff. The fee-level and access-related attributes (waiting and traveling time) emerged as less important. Overall, consumers in Bulgaria value the quality of healthcare provision very highly. Yet, there are some statistically significant differences between socio-demographic groups. CONCLUSION: In general, Bulgarian healthcare consumers are willing to accept higher prices for the services they use, when this comes with improved quality of services. These findings comply with findings in previous studies in Bulgaria and in the region. Given the quality problems in the Bulgarian healthcare sector, our findings indicate that priority has to be given to the improvement of healthcare quality when the Bulgarian government invests in this sector. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Patient charges for health services: the opinions of healthcare stakeholders in Bulgaria.

The reforms of the Bulgarian healthcare sector have been widely discussed, both nationally and internationally. In spite of the reforms, problems with the efficiency, equity and quality in healthcare provision continue to exist in Bulgaria. Among others, the reforms included the implementation of formal patient charges for the use of healthcare services. These were established in the country in 2000. Formal patient charges are applied to all levels of medical services with the exception of emergency care. The aim of this paper is to describe and analyze the attitudes of Bulgarian healthcare stakeholders toward patient charges. The analysis is based on data collected in focus group discussions and in-depth interviews carried out in Bulgaria in May-June 2009. The paper concludes by recommendations for policies related to patient payments. The social sensitivity of these payments requires broad discussion before policy decisions are implemented. There is also a need of a well-thought communication strategy on the issue of patient payments by the Ministry of Health.

Informal payments for health services: the experience of Bulgaria after 10 years of formal co-payments.

BACKGROUND: Informal payments were reported in Bulgaria before and after the introduction of formal co-payments for services included in the basic benefits package in 2000. The aim of our study was to establish the current scale and type of informal payments, as well as public attitudes towards these payments. METHODS: A nationally representative survey of 1003 individuals was conducted in Bulgaria in July 2010 using face-to-face interviews based on a standardized questionnaire. Respondents were selected through a multi-stage random probability method. The questionnaire included questions on total informal payments (in cash and in kind) for health services used by the respondent during the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: About 13% of users reported informal payments for outpatient visits and 33% of users reported to have paid informally for hospitalizations. The average amount paid informally for inpatient services was nearly twice higher than that for outpatient services. More than 50% of the sample had negative attitudes towards informal payments in both cash and kind, but about 27% of respondents had a positive attitude towards giving gifts in kind. Regression analysis showed that respondents with higher levels of education had more negative attitudes towards informal cash payments. Positive attitudes towards gifts in kind were more often stated by citizens of larger cities. CONCLUSION: Informal payments continue to exist in Bulgaria irrespective of the formal co-payments introduced in 2000. Although the problem has been recognized in Bulgaria, policies should aim to eliminate the underlying structural reasons for such payments.

Out-of-pocket payments for health care services in Bulgaria: financial burden and barrier to access.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, Bulgaria has increasingly relied on out-of-pocket payments as one of the main sources of health care financing. However, it is largely unknown whether the official patient charges, combined with informal payments, are affordable for the population. Our study aimed to explore the scale of out-of-pocket payments for health care services and their affordability. METHODS: Data were collected in two nationally representative surveys, conducted in Bulgaria in 2010 and 2011, using face-to-face interviews based on a standardized questionnaire. To select respondents, a multi-stage random probability method was used. The questionnaire included questions on the out-of-pocket payments for health care services used by the respondent during the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 75.7% (2010) and 84.0% (2011) of outpatient service users reported to have paid out-of-pocket, with 12.6% (2010) and 9.7% (2011) of users reporting informal payments. Of those who had used inpatient services, 66.5% (2010) and 63.1% (2011) reported to have made out-of-pocket payments, with 31.8% (2010) and 18.3% (2011) reporting to have paid informally. We found large inability to pay indicated by the need to borrow money and/or forego services. Regression analysis showed that the inability to pay is especially pronounced among those with poor health status and chronic diseases and those on low household incomes. CONCLUSION: The high level of both formal and informal out-of-pocket payments for health care services in Bulgaria poses a considerable burden for households and undermines access to health services for poorer parts of the population.

Bulgaria health system review.

In the last 20 years, demographic development in Bulgaria has been characterized by population decline, a low crude birth rate, a low fertility rate, a high mortality rate and an ageing population. A stabilizing political situation since the early 2000s and an economic upsurge since the mid-2000s were important factors in the slight increase of the birth and fertility rates and the slight decrease in standardized death rates. In general, Bulgaria lags behind European Union (EU) averages in most mortality and morbidity indicators. Life expectancy at birth reached 73.3 years in 2008 with the main three causes of death being diseases of the circulatory system, malignant neoplasms and diseases of the respiratory system. One of the most important risk factors overall is smoking, and the average standardized death rate for smoking-related causes in 2008 was twice as high as the EU15 average. The Bulgarian health system is characterized by limited statism. The Ministry of Health is responsible for national health policy and the overall organization and functioning of the health system and coordinates with all ministries with relevance to public health. The key players in the insurance system are the insured individuals, the health care providers and the third party payers, comprising the National Health Insurance Fund, the single payer in the social health insurance (SHI) system, and voluntary health insurance companies (VHICs). Health financing consists of a publicprivate mix. Health care is financed from compulsory health insurance contributions, taxes, outofpocket (OOP) payments, voluntary health insurance (VHI) premiums, corporate payments, donations, and external funding. Total health expenditure (THE) as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) increased from 5.3% in 1995 to 7.3% in 2008. At the latter date it consisted of 36.5% OOP payments, 34.8% SHI, 13.6% Ministry of Health expenditure, 9.4% municipality expenditure and 0.3% VHI. Informal payments in the health sector represent a substantial part of total OOP payments (47.1% in 2006). The health system is economically unstable and health care establishments, most notably hospitals, are suffering from underfunding. Planning of outpatient health care is based on a territorial principle. Investment for state and municipal health establishments is financed from the state or municipal share in the establishments capital. In the first quarter of 2009, health workers accounted for 4.9% of the total workforce. Compared to other countries, the relative number of physicians and dentists is particularly high but the relative number of nurses remains well below the EU15, EU12 and EU27 averages. Bulgaria is faced with increased professional mobility, which is becoming particularly challenging. There is an oversupply of acute care beds and an undersupply of longterm care and rehabilitation services. Health care reforms after 1989 focused predominantly on ambulatory care and the restructuring of the hospital sector is still pending on the government agenda. Citizens as well as medical professionals are dissatisfied with the health care system and equity is a challenge not only because of differences in health needs, but also because of socioeconomic disparities and territorial imbalances. The need for further reform is pronounced, particularly in view of the low health status of the population. Structural reforms and increased competitiveness in the system as well as an overall support of reform concepts and measures are prerequisites for successful progress.

Bulgaria: health system review

The Health Systems in Transition (HiT) country profiles provide an analytical description of each health system and of reform initiatives in progress or under development. They aim to provide relevant comparative information to support policy-makers and analysts in the development of health systems and reforms in the countries of the WHO European Region and beyond. The HiT profiles are building blocks that can be used: to learn in detail about different approaches to the financing, organization and delivery of health services; to describe accurately the process, content and implementation of health reform programmes; to highlight common challenges and areas that require more in-depth analysis; and to provide a tool for the dissemination of information on health systems and the exchange of experiences of reform strategies between policy-makers and analysts in countries of the WHO European Region. This series is an ongoing initiative and material is updated at regular intervals.

What have 10 years of health insurance reforms brought about in Bulgaria? Re-appraising the Health Insurance Act of 1998.

This article discusses the financial reforms in the Bulgarian public health care sector. Since 1998, when the Bulgarian parliament passed the Health Insurance Act, compulsory contributions for social health insurance have become the main source of health care financing. They replaced the previous tax-based health care funding mechanism. This article reviews empirical evidence and macro indicators to analyse to what extent the expectations of this reform are achieved. Two groups of sources are reviewed: (1) publications prior to the implementation of the social health insurance in Bulgaria that discuss its potential impact; (2) publications after the insurance implementation, that investigate the actual impact of this reform. The results suggest that social health insurance in Bulgaria brought about certain efficiency improvements in the public health care sector. However, the overall social benefit of the reform is doubtful. The main reasons for this are related to the ineffective organisation of the Bulgarian public health care sector, as well as to the overall lack of financial resources for health care in the country.