Citizens’ opinions and experiences related to costs and reimbursements for medications in times of retrenchment: cross-sectional population surveys in 2015 and 2017

Author:

Aaltonen KatriORCID,Niemelä Mikko,Prix Irene

Abstract

Abstract Background Finland has universal coverage for prescription medications under the National Health Insurance. Eligibility schemes target higher reimbursements to individuals with chronic illness. Nevertheless, co-payments always apply, and austerity reforms implemented in 2016 and 2017 led to further increases in co-payments. We examined the extent to which people with chronic illness experienced financial difficulties in purchasing medications, how perceptions of fairness regarding the national reimbursements differs by exposure to policies and medicine use, and in what way do these experiences and opinions vary between surveys collected before and after the reforms. Methods We used two waves of Medicines Barometer (2015 and 2017, pooled n = 10,801), a national, biennial, cross-sectional population survey. Logistic regression analyses were performed with experiences of financial difficulties and perceptions of fairness as dependent variables. We compared people with and without prescription medication use, eligibilities, and/or diabetes (exposure groups), controlling for age, gender, survey type and geographic area (NUTS2). To examine the modifying effect of study year, we fitted models with an interaction term between group and year. Results Respondents with diabetes or eligibility based on chronic illness had a notably higher risk than other respondents with at least some prescription medication use to have experienced financial difficulties in affording medications. The share of respondents experiencing difficulties increased the most among people with diabetes. Three-quarters of respondents were either critical or unsure of whether the reimbursements for medications were fair and just. People with recent prescription medication use tended to be more sceptical than people without. Overall, scepticism tended to be more prevalent in 2017 than in 2015. Conclusions Despite the protective policies in place, individuals with chronic illness were disproportionately burdened by costs of medications already before the reforms. Among individuals with diabetes, financial difficulties were even more prevalent in 2017 than in 2015, which is likely attributed to the particularly high co-payment increases targeted to type 2 diabetes medicines. Perceived fairness of the processes and outcomes of policies and regulations is a key dimension of trust in public policy. Thus, increasing scepticism implies that retrenchment may also have implications in terms of public legitimacy.

Funder

Biotieteiden ja Ympäristön Tutkimuksen Toimikunta

Strategic Research Council

Academy of Finland

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

Reference90 articles.

1. Busse R, Blümel M, Scheller-Kreinsen D, Zentner A. Tackling chronic disease in Europe. Strategies, interventions and challenges. Copenhagen: WHO/European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2010.

2. A Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM/2020/761 final. Brussels: European Commission, 25.11.2020. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0761.

3. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). New health technologies: Managing access, value and sustainability. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266438-en.

4. European Commission, Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety. Defining value in ‘value-based healthcare’: opinion by the Expert Panel on effective ways of investing in Health (EXPH). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2019. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2875/872343.

5. Bæroe K, Baltussen R. Legitimate healthcare limit setting in a real-world setting: Integrating accountability for reasonableness and multi-criteria decision analysis. Public Health Ethics. 2014;7(2):144–57.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3