Since the late 1990s accelerated growth in health care spending coupled with a cost shift of health insurance from employers to employees has created an increased financial burden for many families. Past research suggests that financial burden due to out-of-pocket (OOP) health care costs limits access to health care and may reduce spending on other basic needs, such as food. The primary objective of this study was to assess the relationship between out-of-pocket health care expenditures and food insecurity among families with children. Secondarily, this study examined the relationship between the health status of children and household food security. This study used data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID, 2003) to test whether higher out of pocket health care expenditures increase household food insecurity for families with children. Respondents reported out of pocket expenditures for both medical services and insurance premiums in 2001 and 2002. Food insecurity was measured for the previous 12 months using the 18-item USDA Food Security Survey Module. Multivariate weighted logit analysis was conducted to model the relationship between OOP health care costs and household food security status; and child health status and household food security. There was no evidence that higher OOP health care costs were associated with household food insecurity. However, among families earning less than 300 percent of the federal poverty threshold, having private insurance did increase the likelihood of experiencing food insecurity (OR =4.77, 95% CI = 0.05 - 1.02). Households with a child in poor health were not more likely to experience food insecurity; however having a wife in poor health was associated with food insecurity (OR = 4.00, 95% CI =1.67-9.52). The findings from this study suggest that programs designed to limit OOP health care spending among moderate and low income families should evaluate the impact on household food security. / Graduation date: 2013 / Access restricted to the OSU Community at author's request from July 23, 2012 - July 23, 2013

Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) in Rwanda was promulgated as the best alternative to address the financial barriers for accessibility to health care services for the poor population and the informal sector. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether CBHI reduce Out-of-pocket health expenses for their members as compared to non-members and to what extent CBHI provide financial protection for the poorest population. This research based itself on secondary source of data primarily collected for a prospective quasi-experimental design which evaluated the impact of Performance-Based Financing. The primary study had reported on the Out-Of-Pocket expenses for health by members and non-members of CBHI; residing in a sample of 1961 households; in addition to their demographics and socio-economic characteristics. The findings indicate that insured individuals were about 2.6 times more likely to utilize health care services than respondents without health insurance. It is also worth noting that households with health insurance coverage were less likely to experience a catastrophic health expenditure than households without health insurance (aOR: 0.744; 95% CI:[0.586 - 0.945]), and that the effect of health insurance coverage was higher in people living in poor households than in people living in middle or richer households / Health Studies / M.A. (Public Health)

Au Québec, il est mandatoire d’avoir une assurance médicaments soit privée ou publique. De plus, le coût d’un médicament a trois composantes : le prix de la molécule, la marge bénéficiaire du grossiste et l’honoraire du pharmacien. Les deux premières composantes sont fixes et déterminées par la Régie de l’assurance médicaments du Québec (RAMQ) pour les personnes couvertes par les régimes privés d’assurance médicaments ou le régime public d’assurance médicaments (RPAM). L’honoraire du pharmacien est déterminé par la RAMQ pour les personnes couvertes par le RPAM (entre 8,50$ et 9,49$) alors qu’il est librement déterminé par le pharmacien propriétaire pour les personnes couvertes par les régimes privés d’assurance médicaments ce qui donne lieu à des différences dans le coût des médicaments. Les objectifs de ce mémoire étaient d’estimer la différence de coût et des dépenses des médicaments entre les patients couverts par les régimes privés d’assurance médicaments et le RPAM au Québec. Afin de répondre aux objectifs, les ordonnances remplies entre le 1er janvier 2015 et le 23 mai 2019 ont été sélectionnées de reMed, une banque de données qui contient l’information sur les ordonnances remplies par d’un échantillon de Québécois. Des strates d’ordonnances de médicaments ont été créées afin d’avoir à l’intérieur de chaque strate le même médicament (même DIN), même quantité et durée prescrites, acheté à la même pharmacie avec la même Liste des médicaments de la RAMQ. Chaque strate d’ordonnances remplies par les patients couverts par un régime privé d’assurance médicaments a été appariée à une strate d’ordonnances remplies par des patients couverts par le RPAM sur les mêmes critères utilisés pour la stratification. Des modèles de régression linéaires ont été utilisés afin d’estimer la différence de coût et de dépenses entre les régimes privés d’assurance médicaments et le RPAM. Basée sur 38 896 strates (un total de 162 019 ordonnances), l’étude a montré que globalement le coût d’une ordonnance de médicament est en moyenne 9,35$ (95% CI: 5,58 ; 13,01) plus élevé pour les patients couverts par les régimes privés d’assurance médicaments que pour ceux couverts par le RPAM (62,34$ vs 52,99$). Quant aux dépenses des patients pour une ordonnance de médicament, les patients couverts par un régime privé d’assurance médicaments déboursaient 1,01$ (95% CI: -1,22 ; -0,80) moins que ceux couverts par le RPAM (6.94$ vs 7.95$). Cette étude a montré qu’en moyenne le coût des médicaments est plus élevé et que les dépenses sont légèrement plus faibles pour les patients couverts par les régimes privés d’assurance médicaments. Donc, ces résultats seront utiles pour les décideurs et les autorités gouvernementales lorsqu’ils prendront des décisions éclairées sur les modalités d’assurance au Québec. / In the province of Quebec, it’s mandatory to have a drug insurance either private or public. Also, drug cost in Quebec has three components: ingredient list price, wholesaler markup and dispensing fee. The first two components are regulated by the Prescription drug plan (PDP) and are the same for publicly and privately insured patients. The third component is fixed (between CAD$8.50 and CAD$9.49) and regulated by the PDP for publicly insured patients while it is determined freely by the pharmacy owner for privately insured patients. The objectives of this thesis were to estimate the average difference for both drug and out-of-pocket costs between patients covered by private drug plans and the PDP in Quebec. We used a sample of prescriptions filled between January 1st, 2015 and May 23rd , 2019 selected from reMed, a drug claims database of Quebecers. We created strata of prescriptions filled by privately insured patients based on the DIN, quantity dispensed, number of days of supply, pharmacy identifier and a date corresponding to a publication of RAMQ’s List of Medications. Then, we matched each stratum filled by privately insured patients with a stratum of prescriptions filled by publicly insured patients based on the same stratification criteria. The differences in drug cost and out-of-pocket expenses between private and public drug insurance were analyzed with linear regression models. Based on 38 896 strata of prescriptions (162 019 prescriptions in total), we observed that privately insured patients had to pay CAD$9.35 (95% CI: 5.58 ; 13.01) more on average per drug prescription than publicly insured patients (CAD$62.34 vs CAD$52.99), representing a difference of 17.6%. We also found that out-of-pocket expenses were on average CAD$1.01 (95% CI: -1.22 ; -0.80) lower per drug prescription for privately than publicly insured patients (CAD$6.94 vs CAD$7.95). This study showed that, on average, drug cost is substantially higher and out-of-pocket slightly lower for privately insured Quebecers. Knowing that adherence is affected by drug cost, these results will be useful to help public health authorities to make informed decisions about drug insurance policies.

L’assurance médicaments est un des facteurs qui peuvent influencer l’adhésion aux médicaments. Les objectifs de ce mémoire étaient d’évaluer l’impact du type d’assurance médicaments (publique versus privée) sur l’adhésion et le coût des antihypertenseurs et d’évaluer l’impact des procédures de remboursement et de la contribution du patient sur l’adhésion aux médicaments prescrits pour traiter une maladie chronique. Afin de répondre à ces objectifs, deux cohortes rétrospectives ont été construites à partir des bases de données de la RAMQ et reMed : une cohorte appariée d’utilisateurs d’antihypertenseurs couverts par une assurance médicaments privée ou publique et une cohorte de patients couverts par une assurance médicaments privée ayant rempli au moins une ordonnance pour un médicament traitant une maladie chronique. Les résultats montrent que le niveau d’adhésion aux antihypertenseurs était similaire entre les deux types d’assurance médicaments et que le coût des antihypertenseurs était 28,9 % plus élevé au privé. De plus, il a été observé que les procédures de remboursement n’affectaient pas l’adhésion, alors que le niveau de contribution des patients l’affectait. Les patients qui déboursaient un plus grand montant à l’achat de leurs médicaments étaient moins adhérents (différence : -19,0 %, Intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : -24,0 à -13,0), alors que les patients qui n’avaient rien à débourser étaient moins adhérents (différence : -9,0 %, IC à 95 % : -15,0 à -2,0), que ceux qui devaient débourser une petite somme. Les résultats présentés dans ce mémoire montrent que l’assurance médicaments influence l’adhésion par l’entremise des caractéristiques des plans d’assurance. / Drug insurance is one of many factors that can influence medication adherence. The objectives of this thesis were to evaluate the impact of the type of drug insurance (private versus public) on adherence to antihypertensive medications and the cost of medications, and to evaluate the impact of drug reimbursement procedures and out-of pocket expenses on adherence to medications prescribed for chronic diseases. To meet these objectives, two retrospective cohorts were constructed from the RAMQ and reMed databases: a matched cohort of antihypertensive users covered by private or public drug insurance and a cohort of patients covered by private drug insurance who filled at least one prescription for a medication prescribed for a chronic disease. The results have shown that the level of adherence to antihypertensive medications was similar between the two types of drug insurance and that the cost of antihypertensive medications was 28,9% higher for those privately insured. It was also observed that drug reimbursement procedures didn’t affect medication adherence, while the level of out-of-pocket expenses affected it. Patients with the highest out-of-pocket expenses were less adherent (difference: –19.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: –24.0 to –13.0), while patients with no out-of-pocket expenses were less adherent (difference: -9.0%; 95% CI: –15.0 to –2.0) than those with low out-of-pocket expenses. The results presented in this thesis have shown that drug insurance affects medication adherence through the characteristics of drug insurance plans.

Cette thèse s’intéresse, en France, à la place de l’assurance maladie privée (ou complémentaire) dans l’organisation globale du système d’assurance, sous l’angle des inégalités sociales et de la solidarité entre les individus bien-portants et les malades. Elle étudie en particulier le rôle joué par l’assurance complémentaire sur l’accès aux soins, la mutualisation des dépenses de santé et le bien-être de la population. Les travaux menés dans cette thèse révèlent l’importance de l’assurance complémentaire pour accéder à des soins reportés dans le temps pour raisons financières. Ils montrent en revanche que, généraliser l’assurance complémentaire, dans le modèle actuel de co-financement des soins, ne permet ni de répondre à des objectifs d’équité ni-même d’améliorer le bien-être de la population. Ils révèlent en sus que l’assurance complémentaire induit une moindre mutualisation des dépenses de santé pour les plus malades et invitent à repenser son rôle dans le financement des soins. / This thesis deals with the place of private health insurance in the overall health insurance scheme in France, focusing on social inequalities and on solidarity between healthy individuals and sick patients. It particular, it addresses the role of private health insurance on access to health care, mutualization of health expenditure, and welfare. The results of this thesis reveal the key role of private health insurance to access to care postponed over time for financial reasons. However, our results also show that generalizing complementary health insurance in the current health insurance scheme does not allow pursuing equity goals nor increasing welfare. They finally reveal that the mutualization induced by private health insurance appears relatively weak, compared to the one induced by public health insurance. They therefore encourage a change in the role of private health insurance in funding medical care.

The exponential growth in medical pharmaceuticals and related clinical trials have created a need to better understand the decision-making factors in the processes for developing hospital medication formularies. The purpose of the study was to identify, rank, and compare major factors impacting hospital formulary decision-making among three prescriber groups serving on a hospital's pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee. Prescribers were selected from the University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center which is a large, multi-facility, academic oncology hospital. Specifically, the prescriber groups studied were comprised of physicians, midlevel providers, and pharmacists. A self-administered online survey was disseminated to participants. Seven major hospital formulary decision-making factors were identified in the scientific literature. Study participants were asked to respond to questions about each of the hospital formulary decision-making factors and to rank the various formulary decision-making factors from the factor deemed most important to the factor deemed least important. There are five major conclusions drawn from the study including three similarities and two significant differences among the prescriber groups and factors. Similarities include: (1) the factor "pharmacy staff's evaluation of medical evidence including formulary recommendations" was ranked highest for all three prescriber groups; (2) "evaluation of medications by expert physicians" was ranked second for physicians and midlevel providers while pharmacists ranked it third; and (3) the factor, "financial impact of the treatment to the patient" was fifth in terms of hospital formulary decision-making statement and ranking by all three prescriber groups. Two significant differences include: (1) for the hospital-formulary decision making statement, "I consider the number of patients affected by adding, removing, or modifying a drug on the formulary when making hospital medication formulary decisions," midlevel providers considered this factor of significantly greater importance than did physicians; and (2) for the ranked hospital formulary decision-making factor, "financial impact of treatment to the institution," pharmacists ranked this factor significantly higher than did physicians. This study contributes to a greater understanding of the three prescriber groups serving on a P&T committee. Also, the study contributes to the body of literature regarding decision-making processes in medicine and specifically factors impacting hospital formulary decision-making. Furthermore, this study has the potential to impact the operational guidelines for the P&T committee at the University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center as well as other hospitals.

Given the general poor state of health care and the devastating effect of user fee, the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) was instituted as a health financing policy with the main purpose to ensure universal access for all Nigerians. However, since NHIS became operational in 2005, only members of scheme are able to access health care both in the public and in private sectors, representing about 3% of Nigerian population. The thesis therefore examines the design and implementation policy of NHIS in Oyo state, Nigeria. Key design issues conceptual framework guides the analysis of data. The framework identifies three health interrelated financing functions namely revenue collection, risk pooling and purchasing. Data was collected from the NHIS officials, employees of the Health Maintenance Organisations (HMOs) and the Health Care Providers (HCPs) using key informant interview. In addition, in-depth interview and semi structure questionnaire were used to gather data from the enrolees and the nonenrolees. Empirical findings show that NHIS is fragmented given the existence of several programmes. In addition, there is no risk pooling neither redistribution of funds in the scheme. Revenue generated through contributions from the enrolees was not sufficient to fund health care services received by the beneficiaries because of the small percentage of the Nigerian population that the scheme covers. Further findings indicate that enrolled federal civil servants have not commenced monthly contribution to the NHIS. They pay 10% as co-pay in every consultation while federal government as an employer subsidised by 90%. Majority (76.8%) of the respondents agreed that they were financially protected from catastrophic spending. However, the overall benefit package was rated moderate because of exclusion of some priority and essential health care needs. Although above half (57%) of the respondents concurred that HMOs are accessible, in the overall, (47.6%) of the respondents were not satisfied with their services. In the case of the HCPs, majority (61.9%) of the respondents claimed that there is no excessive waiting time for consultation. Furthermore, (64.3%) rated their interpersonal relationship with the HCPs to be good. However, more than half of the respondents (54%) disagreed on availability of prescribed drugs in NHIS accredited health facilities. For the nonenrolees, findings show that most of the respondents (72.9%) were willing to enrol, but significant proportion (47.5%) indicated financial constraint as impediment to enrolment. / Sociology / D. Phil. (Sociology)

Non-monetary deprivation indicators are now widely used for studying and measuring poverty in Europe. However, despite their prevalence, the empirical performance of existing deprivation scales has rarely been examined. This thesis i) identifies possible conceptual problems of existing deprivation scales such as indexing, missing dimensions and threshold; ii) empirically assesses the extent of possible error in measurement related to these conceptual problems; and iii) offer an alternative way for constructing deprivation measures to mitigate the identified conceptual problems. The thesis consists of four stand-alone papers, accompanied by an overarching introduction and conclusion. The first three papers provide empirical evidence on the empirical consequences of the missing dimensions and threshold problems for the measurement and analysis of poverty, while the fourth paper exemplifies a concept-led multidimensional design that can reduce the error introduced by these conceptual problems. The analysis is generally held for 25 EU countries using European Survey of Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC); only in the second paper, the analysis is done for the UK using British Household Panel Survey (BHPS).