The Relationship Between the Scope of Essential Health Benefits and Statutory Financing: An International Comparison Across Eight European Countries

Abstract

Background: Both rising healthcare costs and the global financial crisis have fueled a search for policy tools in order to avoid unsustainable future financing of essential health benefits. The scope of essential health benefits (the range of services covered) and depth of coverage (the proportion of costs of the covered benefits that is covered publicly) are corresponding variables in determining the benefits package. We hypothesized that a more comprehensive health benefit package may increase user costsharing charges. Methods: We conducted a desktop research study to assess the interrelationship between the scope of covered health benefits and the height of statutory spending in a sample of 8 European countries: Belgium, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Scotland, Sweden, and Switzerland. We conducted a targeted literature search to identify characteristics of the healthcare systems in our sample of countries. We analyzed similarities and differences based on the dimensions of publicly financed healthcare as published by the European Observatory on Health Care Systems. Results: We found that the scope of services is comparable and comprehensive across our sample, with only marginal differences. Cost-sharing arrangements show the most variation. In general, we found no direct interrelationship in this sample between the ranges of services covered in the health benefits package and the height of public spending on healthcare. With regard to specific services (dental care, physical therapy), we found indications of an association between coverage of services and cost-sharing arrangements. Strong variations in the volume and price of healthcare services between the 8 countries were found for services with large practice variations. Conclusion: Although reducing the scope of the benefit package as well as increasing user charges may contribute to the financial sustainability of healthcare, variations in the volume and price of care seem to have a much larger impact on financial sustainability. Policy-makers should focus on a variety of measures within an integrated approach. There is no silver bullet for addressing the sustainability of healthcare. Implications for policy makers• Reduction of the scope of the benefit package and an increase of user charges has limited impact on the reduction of the volume and cost of care at the macro level. Supply constraints may have a much larger impact on reducing the volume of care and thus the long-term financial sustainability of public healthcare provision. • Policy-makers should focus on a variety of measures within an integrated approach, including considerations for services covered, costsharing arrangements, stimulating evidence-based practice, the monitoring and reduction of unwarranted variation, and control mechanisms for the price of healthcare services. Implications for publicCoverage for healthcare services funded by public revenues in our sample of 8 European countries is comparable and comprehensive, with only marginal differences. It is the c...

Nursing Care Coordination for Patients with Complex Needs in Primary Healthcare: A Scoping Review

“…Over the last two decades, integration has become a major concern for many governments and healthcare systems [ 1 2 3 4 ]. With limited financial resources, aging populations, and comorbid chronic diseases [ 5 6 7 ], many countries have recognized the need to move from fragmented and discontinued care towards a more integrated healthcare system [ 8 ]. Studies showed the potential of integrated care to improve continuity of care, accessibility, quality and safety of care, as well as cost effectiveness of services [ 9 ].…”

Exploring User-Related Drivers of the Early Acceptance of Certified Digital Stress Prevention Programs in Germany

“…42,53 Furthermore, our study was conducted in Germany, but this does not restrict comparisons with other countries or health systems, especially those also offering public funding of primary prevention. 22 Moreover, it is interesting to note that the utilization rates of mental health services in Germany are not higher than in other countries. 83 Within the control variables, we assessed age in groups due to data privacy concerns as paper-and-pencil surveys were collected within the personal environment of some authors.…”

“…Several European countries like Germany cover the costs of preventive health services by public financing. 22 In Germany, 85% to 87% of citizens (about 70 million) have statutory health insurance. 23,24 Cost reimbursement or subsidy of individual-based prevention courses (80%-100%) that are approved by the central certification unit for prevention for all members require regular participation, which can be hardly attainable for populations like shift workers.…”

Untitled

“…However, considering some of the International researches, European countries revealed that by increasing user charges will lead towards inequality between high and low incomes [14]. The European Observatory concluded that the cost-sharing policy should be done in systematic and evidence-based manner.…”