Commentary

Are SAARC countries prepared to combat COVID-19 to save young, working-age population?

  • Received: 01 May 2020 Accepted: 28 June 2020 Published: 01 July 2020
  • The COVID-19 outbreak has expanded across the globe. Most of the countries are launching different measures to stop the transmission of this virus. However, the death toll is steadily rising. Strikingly the rate of coronavirus infection among the young-age population is the highest in SAARC countries as more than 80% population of the SAARC countries are young who constitute the working-age group. The disease transmission also occurs at a slower rate presumably due to diverse lifestyles of different ethnicities, immunity and genetic traits; but not because of the hot and humid weather despite previous assumptions. Since SAARC countries comprise 23.75% of the world population and the largest portion of these people is the young working-class, some immediate measures need to be implemented to save these valuable lives from COVID-19. Till now, there is no specific treatment or vaccine available; hence timely-taken preventive measures are the only hope that can save the people of this region. Here we have demonstrated an altered disease transmission pattern in people of SAARC countries, measures initiated by the governments, causes of failure and further actions to be taken to control disease transmission.

    Citation: Farhana Sultana, Hasan Mahmud Reza. Are SAARC countries prepared to combat COVID-19 to save young, working-age population?[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(3): 440-449. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020036

    Related Papers:

    [1] Jacqueline C Wiltshire, Kimberly R Enard, Edlin Garcia Colato, Barbara Langland Orban . Problems paying medical bills and mental health symptoms post-Affordable Care Act. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(2): 274-286. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020023
    [2] Larrell L. Wilkinson, Saundra H. Glover, Janice C. Probst, Bo Cai, Lisa T. Wigfall . Psychological Distress and Health Insurance Coverage among Formerly Incarcerated Young Adults in the United States. AIMS Public Health, 2015, 2(3): 227-246. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2015.3.227
    [3] Promise Tewogbola, Norah Aung . Identifying the insured and uninsured in rural America: an empirical discriminant analysis. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(3): 421-427. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021032
    [4] Swapna Reddy, Matthew Speer, Mary Saxon, Madison Ziegler, Zaida Dedolph, Siman Qaasim . Evaluating network adequacy of oral health services for children on Medicaid in Arizona. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(1): 53-61. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022005
    [5] LacreishaEjike-King, RashidaDorsey . Reducing Ex-offender Health Disparities through the Affordable Care Act: Fostering Improved Health Care Access and Linkages to Integrated Care. AIMS Public Health, 2014, 1(2): 76-83. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2014.2.76
    [6] Kelly Graff, Ye Ji Choi, Lori Silveira, Christiana Smith, Lisa Abuogi, Lisa Ross DeCamp, Jane Jarjour, Chloe Friedman, Meredith A. Ware, Jill L Kaar . Lessons learned for preventing health disparities in future pandemics: the role of social vulnerabilities among children diagnosed with severe COVID-19 early in the pandemic. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(1): 124-136. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025009
    [7] Lixian Zhong, Yidan Huyan, Elena Andreyeva, Matthew Lee Smith, Gang Han, Keri Carpenter, Samuel D Towne, Sagar N Jani, Veronica Averhart Preston, Marcia G. Ory . Predicting high-cost, commercially-insured people with diabetes in Texas: Characteristics, medical utilization patterns, and urban-rural comparisons. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(1): 259-274. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025016
    [8] Rizwana Biviji, Nikita Vora, Nalani Thomas, Daniel Sheridan, Cindy M. Reynolds, Faith Kyaruzi, Swapna Reddy . Evaluating the network adequacy of vision care services for children in Arizona: A cross sectional study. AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(1): 141-159. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024007
    [9] James A. Swartz, Dana Franceschini, Kamryn Scamperle . Mental health and substance use disorder comorbidities among Medicaid beneficiaries: Associations with opioid use disorder and prescription opioid misuse. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(3): 658-677. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023046
    [10] Rebecca Howes-Mischel . Stocking up on Fish Mox: a Systematic Analysis of Cultural Narratives about Self-medicating in Online Forums. AIMS Public Health, 2017, 4(5): 430-445. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2017.5.430
  • The COVID-19 outbreak has expanded across the globe. Most of the countries are launching different measures to stop the transmission of this virus. However, the death toll is steadily rising. Strikingly the rate of coronavirus infection among the young-age population is the highest in SAARC countries as more than 80% population of the SAARC countries are young who constitute the working-age group. The disease transmission also occurs at a slower rate presumably due to diverse lifestyles of different ethnicities, immunity and genetic traits; but not because of the hot and humid weather despite previous assumptions. Since SAARC countries comprise 23.75% of the world population and the largest portion of these people is the young working-class, some immediate measures need to be implemented to save these valuable lives from COVID-19. Till now, there is no specific treatment or vaccine available; hence timely-taken preventive measures are the only hope that can save the people of this region. Here we have demonstrated an altered disease transmission pattern in people of SAARC countries, measures initiated by the governments, causes of failure and further actions to be taken to control disease transmission.


    Individuals seeking healthcare, particularly those with limited financial resources, often suffer significant financial strain due to out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) [1],[2]. Shockingly, an estimated 17 percent of the global population experiences catastrophic health expenditure (CHE), with a vast majority of cases originating in Asia and Africa [3]. The combination of OOPE, poor health, and inadequate government spending has led health policymakers to tout health insurance as a critical tool for reform in developing countries [4]. As a result, numerous government-supported and community-based health insurance schemes (CBHI) have emerged, designed to provide financial protection and mitigate the burden of OOPE [4]. However, the effectiveness of these insurance programs remains uncertain, with some studies indicating a reduction in OOPE [5], while others report their failure [6][8]. Within the realm of healthcare policy, there is a push among policymakers to incorporate private health insurance as a complementary option to public-funded health insurance (PFHI) to improve overall health coverage for the populace [9],[10]. However, it remains unclear whether private health insurance can effectively alleviate the burden of healthcare expenses. To shed light on this issue, our current study delves into the intricacies of private health insurance coverage by closely analyzing hospital bills in relation to both patient and insurance claims.

    Scholars have investigated this knowledge domain from multiple perspectives, such as the penetration and acceptance levels of private health insurance [11],[12], factors influencing the choice of health insurance [11],[12], the role of private health insurance in healthcare utilization [13],[14], and OOPE [9],[13],[15],[16]. Although the performance of health insurance in enabling healthcare utilization and containing cost is a trending topic among the research community, most of the studies are skewed towards not-for-profit (public) health insurance, leaving a knowledge vacuum in the private health insurance landscape. A few researchers have attempted to bridge this gap by evaluating private health insurance [9],[13][16]. Healthcare burden due to forgone care and less healthcare utilization due to higher insurance cost sharing is reflected among US citizens [14]. In addition, OOPE is reported to be six times higher in Australian and Chinese citizens with private health insurance than PFHI [15],[16]. However, Grigorakis [17] and Volker [9] have endorsed private health insurance as a complement to PFHI in improving health coverage. This is successful in Greece, Vietnam, and Israel in tackling the stifling OOPE [9],[17].

    Despite these significant contributions to the outcomes of private health insurance, methodological concerns persist due to the limitation of data collection techniques used in large-scale surveys. Scholars have challenged the credibility of primary data obtained through surveys owing to its inherent recall bias [9],[13][16]. Roa [18], Sinha [19], and Wagstaff [20] also have questioned this obscurity in information extracted from large-scale national surveys. This demands a fresh insight into the role of private health insurance in allaying healthcare costs by evaluating data available at the institutional level. The current study is an earnest endeavor in this regard. To accomplish the overarching goal of the study, we seek answers to the following research questions:

    • What is the share of out-of-pocket disbursal in total inpatient expenditure?

    • What is the pattern of coverage as per various cost heads?

    • Is there any association between patient profile and healthcare expenditures?

    Our study makes a few contributions. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study in the field of private health insurance based on a hospital database to address an observed methodological and theoretical void. Second, this study provides insight into the underinsurance phenomenon latent in private health insurance and coverage patterns under different cost heads. These insights may help health policymakers design optimized and affordable health insurance plans for patients. Thirdly, from the patients' perspective, we provide an overview of the reimbursement pattern by private health insurance, suggesting ideal healthcare plan options to consider.

    The Indian insurance industry is broadly classified into life insurance and non–life insurance or General Insurance, which includes Health, Marine, Motor, and Fire insurance. Government-sponsored health insurance in India began in 1948 with the introduction of Employee State Insurance (ESI) and, subsequently, the Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) in 1954. After nationalizing the general insurance industry, the Mediclaim policy was introduced by the General Insurance Company in 1986 [21]. Entry of private insurance happened soon after the liberalization of industry in 2000 by the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority (IRDA). Presently, there are six standalone private health insurance companies in the country [22]. Health insurance plans in India include hospitalization policy, hospital daily cash benefit policy, critical illness policy, and surgical cash benefit policy [22]. Hospitalization policy consists of family floater health insurance and individual health insurance. Due to many health insurance products and a variety of features, IRDA launched a standard health insurance scheme called “Arogya Sanjeevani” to have a common policy wording across the industry and provide financial assistance to the public [21],[22].

    Financial risk protection against household healthcare expenditure has become the core focus of all elements of UHC across the globe, drawing the researcher's ample attention to health insurance [23],[24]. Many studies have tried to assess the outcome of health insurance schemes [25][27], but they confined their focus to PFHI such as Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY), Vajpayee Arogyashree (VAS), Rajiv Arogyashree (RAS), and PMJAY. These studies have contended that such insurance schemes could not accomplish the primary objective of cashless treatment [25][29]. Hence, scholars have advocated expanding private health insurance to improve health coverage [30]. Thus, it is imperative to explore the pros and cons of private health insurance.

    A large growing body of literature has investigated health insurance in India from both economic and social points of view. These include the evaluation of PFHI [31][33], community-based health insurance [34],[35], micro-insurance [36], and private health insurance [13] in OOPE prevention and healthcare utilization [13],[14], satisfaction of policy holders regarding the claim settlement across public and private health insurance [37], willingness of health insurance purchase [11],[38], challenges of health insurance in India [39], and coverage trends of private health insurance [40]. Studies on financial protection from health care expenditure by PFHI offer no conclusive evidence to declare the policies that had any impact on preventing OOPE [31][33]. The outcome on the role of CBHI in preventing OOPE received mixed outcomes. When Devadasan [34] argues that CBHI significantly reduces the healthcare burden, Eze [35] contradicts the findings in the latest review. We identify that CBHI is least effective in protecting healthcare seekers from OOPE across lower-middle-income countries, including India [35]. A similar trend is observed in the process of micro health insurance [36] and private health insurance [13] to provide financial protection to its policyholders.

    A few researchers have explored policyholders' satisfaction [37] and their willingness to purchase public and private health insurance schemes [11],[38],[40]. The results reveal that most insurance holders are more satisfied with the public health insurance sector than the private. Dror [38] argues that the willingness to purchase health insurance is perceptibly higher among those who have already been insured than the uninsured or never insured. This is because the insured are more aware of the likely benefit of health insurance than the uninsured. The work of Yadav [11] offers additional insight into the likelihood of a policy renewal rather than a fresh subscription by highlighting the awareness of the need for health insurance, the risk coverage, and the tax benefits provided by the policy. In addition, the number of members in the family, health status, financial status, and age also have a significant relationship to the purchase decision [41],[42]. Binny [39] has explored the challenges faced by private health insurance companies in expanding coverage and identified a few hurdles, such as a high incurred claim ratio, the rising cost of insurance products, the lack of facilities to understand the disease pattern among the population and changing needs of customers [39]. Another study on the coverage pattern of health insurance has indicated the burden of outpatient costs, which is not a full-fledged offering under private health insurance [40]. Hence, the literature offers no evidence on the role of even PFHI in ensuring financial protection.

    The ineffectiveness of PFHI, as a financial safeguard has resulted in encouraging private health insurance to act as a complement to improve coverage and reduce OOPE by health policymakers [41]. Considering the growing importance of private health insurance and the lack of evidence on whether it reduces financial distress, it is necessary to investigate the role of private health insurance in containing excess medical expenditure. Therefore, we examine the role of private health insurance on health expenditure using institutional-level billing data.

    We employed a cross-sectional research design using one-year billing information of hospitalized patients with private health insurance policies. The necessary data were extracted from the billing database and Electronic Medical Record (EMR), for 12 months, April 2022 through March 2023, of a 2000-plus-bed multi-specialty tertiary care teaching hospital located in the coastal region of south Karnataka, India. The hospital caters to more than six lakh patients annually and is considered a major network hospital providing service for leading health insurance companies in India. During the study phase, it is understood that the hospital undertakes services for more than 15 health insurance companies.

    To answer the research questions formulated for this investigation, we examined the data on billing and insurance claims of 13,115 private health insurance holders hospitalized in a multispecialty tertiary teaching care hospital for one year. The data comprises the proportion of health insurance coverage under various cost heads such as consumables, services, medicine, and bed costs. The expenditure data were extracted at two levels:

    Level 1: Total inpatient expenditure (TIE): The inpatient billing department extracted the costs incurred for patients per hospitalization. This data comprised information on the total expenditure incurred for inpatient services, the reimbursed amount received from the health insurance company, and the remaining amount paid by the patient.

    Level 2: TIE breakups: TIE is the summation of the amount billed against the hospitalized patient under various sub-categories. These include costs incurred for inpatient services, care packages, costs incurred for inpatient medicines and materials used, and costs incurred for patient accommodation (bed costs). To investigate the share of each sub-category in TIE and reimbursement received, we accessed the primary billing databases using the unique identification number.

    1. Total Inpatient Expenditure (TIE): TIE is the total amount incurred for inpatient services. This includes the cost incurred for treatment packages, services, materials, medicines, and beds.

    • Package cost: The amount incurred for a bundle of services for a specific disease. For example, our data shows that treatment packages are common in cardiac conditions and procedures such as angiograms or angioplasty.

    • Service cost: It includes the amount incurred for services such as admission charges, consultation fees, documentation charges, nursing charges, diet services, inpatient diagnosis charges, inpatient lab costs, etc.

    • Material cost: Includes the amount incurred for consumables for inpatient services such as gloves, masks, pads, cardiac stents, etc.

    • Medicine cost: Is defined as the amount incurred for the purchase of medicine during hospitalization on an inpatient basis but excludes any medicines purchased on an outpatient basis.

    • Bed cost: It includes the cost incurred by a patient during hospitalization. The bed facilities are categorized into ICU bed, general, semi-private, semi-special, semi-deluxe, special, super-deluxe, deluxe, and luxury suite.

    2. Coverage amount: Is reimbursed by the insurance company based on the health plan against the cost heads.

    3. OOPE: Includes the amount paid by the patient as an in-patient after the reimbursement received from the health insurance company.

    The primary data extracted from the inpatient billing department comprises the relevant information on 13,115 patients. However, the primary billing data (N = 13,115) consists only of the total cost incurred in inpatient services and the total amount reimbursed. Unless categorized, these data cannot confer useful information on the pattern of coverage as per various cost heads (Research question 2). However, cataloguing the entire data (N = 13,115) appeared puzzling and laborious. Therefore, to study the reimbursement pattern of health insurance plans under different cost heads, we selected 5% of patients from each disease category through proportionate simple random sampling (n = 656). This breakdown is presented in Table 1.

    Table 1.  A proportionate sample number of patients.
    Sl. No Disease conditions Total Cases (5%)
    1. Cardiac conditions 1497 75
    2. Disease for internal organs 4468 224
    3. Cancer conditions 1727 86
    4. Renal conditions 1418 71
    5. Musculoskeletal conditions 1418 71
    6. Obstetrics and gynecology 2054 102
    7. Neurological conditions 360 18
    8. Psychiatric conditions 156 7
    Total 13115 656

    Source: Present study.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The data analysis comprises two sets of data: population data and sample data. Population data (N = 13,115) are used to elicit an overall picture of this study's focus and estimate TIE and the share of OOPE in TIE. The sample data (n = 656) examines the disease-specific reimbursement pattern, the relative weightage of a specific disease, and cost heads in mustering OOPE. The data were coded and analyzed using Jamovi (V. 2.4.14). We used descriptive statistics to estimate the median and mean expenditure incurred by the patient. The patient profile was expressed using frequency distribution. The normality of the variables was investigated using the Shapiro-Wilk test, which highlighted the violation of normality. The association between the patient profile indicators and health expenditure was assessed using Spearman rank correlations for ordinal variables and Kendal Tau for nominal variables.

    We present the results of data analysis with the guiding research questions in mind, as presented under the ensuing three subheads.

    Here, we present the patient profile for 656 samples. The majority (46.5 percent) of the patients fall within the age group of 51 to 65 years of age. The superiority of males is observed in the selected samples, representing 65.1 percent. Information regarding the length of stay (LOS) indicates that a major share of patients reported having LOS less than three days. The details of the patient profile are presented in Table 2.

    Table 2.  Profile of patient sample selected for detailed investigation (n = 656).
    Patient Profile
    Age (in years)
    Counts Percentage Total Cumulative Percentage
    18–35 47 7.2 % 7.2 %
    36–50 110 16.8 % 24.0 %
    51–65 304 46.5 % 70.5 %
    66–80 180 27.5 % 98.0 %
    >80 13 2.0 % 100.0 %
    Gender
    Female 228 34.9 % 34.9 %
    Male 426 65.1 % 100.0 %
    Length of stay (in days)
    0–3 260 39.8 % 39.8 %
    4–6 210 32.1 % 71.9 %
    7–9 74 11.3 % 83.2 %
    >9 110 16.8 % 100.0 %

    Source: Present study.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Here, we highlight the indicators of the financial burden of patients with private health insurance admitted for one year (April 2022 through March 2023). Out of 13,115 data points analyzed, 98.5 percent (N = 12,913) experience OOPE for in-patient services despite being insured. The magnitude of OOPE is estimated by assessing the proportion to TIE at an interval of 10 percent (Table 3). It is observed that 50 percent of the inpatients experience an OOPE up to 30 percent of TIE. The median OOPE faced by the inpatient is ₹5773 (₹1 = USD 0.012), and the mean OOPE is ₹17,558.78 (σ = ₹41,979). The median and mean reimbursement from insurance companies is ₹18,323 and ₹40,574.69 (σ = ₹60,058), respectively.

    Table 3.  Share of OOPE to TIE among the private insurance holders.
    Sl. No Patient's share to TIE (%) Frequency Percentage Frequency
    1. 0–10 2785 21.24
    2. 10–20 2676 20.40
    3. 20–30 2237 17.06
    4. 30–40 1590 12.12
    5. 40–50 1296 9.88
    6. 50–60 889 6.78
    7. 60–70 516 3.93
    8. 70–80 572 4.36
    9. 80–90 449 3.42
    10. 90–100 105 0.80
    Total 13,115 100

    Source: Present study.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The median and mean estimates of inpatient healthcare cost (TIE), OOPE, and coverage amount reimbursed for in-patients with various disease conditions are presented in Table 4.

    Table 4.  Disease-wise inpatient healthcare cost (amount in ₹ thousands).
    Disease conditions Numerical summaries TIE OOPE Coverage amount
    Cardiac Min 14.322 0 0
    Median (Mean) 145.468 (160.374) 7.598 (25.285) 137.870 (135.089)
    Max 1002.245 463.843 867.245
    SD 159.952 58.495 135.742
    Disease for internal organs Min 4.494 0 3.484
    Median (Mean) 63.192 (101.154) 8.925 (23.897) 54.267 (77.257)
    Max 1121.015 896.015 528.541
    SD 128.880 67.565 86.114
    Cancer Min 3.630 0 2.700
    Median (Mean) 41.631 (69.415) 3.410 (12.824) 38.221 (56.591)
    Max 457.499 200.264 417.760
    SD 80.784 29.000 70.557
    Renal Min 6.354 0 5.263
    Median (Mean) 55.045 (68.151) 7.195 (13.890) 47.850 (54.261)
    Max 445.893 131.721 314.172
    SD 67.155 19.402 51.250
    Reproductive Min 5.293 0 3.387
    Median (Mean) 56.902 (63.571) 8.305 (14.688) 48.597 (48.883)
    Max 222.828 98.895 207.355
    SD 42.227 17.709 34.287
    Musculoskeletal Min 8.369 0 5.076
    Median (Mean) 117.027 (130.348) 12.021 (26.506) 105.006 (10.841)
    Max 508.871 397.821 256.044
    SD 92.681 59.609 62.384
    Neurological Min 15.559 1.000 0
    Median (Mean) 66.450 (95.316) 5.811 (14.568) 60.639 (80.747)
    Max 382.818 70.391 312.427
    SD 88.995 18.624 75.292
    Psychiatric Min 10.403 1.198 9.205
    Median (Mean) 31.336 (30.065) 5.188 (8.710) 26.148 (21.355)
    Max 44.983 34.983 35.267
    SD 11.806 11.778 9.886

    Source: Present study.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Patients with cardiac disease conditions incurred the highest median TIE (₹145,468). This is followed by patients with musculoskeletal disease conditions (₹117,027) and neurological conditions (₹66,450). Out-of-pocket share among the TIE is dominated by patients with ailments related to musculoskeletal (₹12,021), followed by patients with general disease conditions (₹8925) and reproductive health with a median cost of ₹8305. The insurance company covers a substantial amount of the TIE. For example, the median reimbursement cost received by cardiac patients is ₹137,870. Patients hospitalized with musculoskeletal conditions received a median reimbursement of ₹105,006. Similarly, patients with other disease conditions related to reproductive health and general ailments received ₹48,597 and ₹54,267, respectively. The private health insurance company provides significant coverage for the expenditure incurred by an inpatient insurer.

    The TIE is categorized into costs incurred for packages, services, materials, medicine, and beds. Therefore, we analyzed the coverage provided by health insurance in each category (Table 5).

    Table 5.  Share of health insurance coverage in inpatient cost (n = 656; amount in ₹ thousands).
    Items Numerical summaries Total amount Coverage amount OOPE
    Packages Min 0 0 0
    Median (Mean) 0 (6.836) 0 (6.760) 0 (0.076)
    Max 400.000 400.000 16.000
    SD 29.309 29,.019 0.972
    Services Min 0.560 0 0
    Median (Mean) 31.905 (47.532) 29.915 (43.128) 1.990 (4.404)
    Max 54.123 375.447 426.237
    SD 58.260 46.582 28.276
    Materials Min 0 0 0
    Median (Mean) 4.931 (7.731) 2.655 (5.433) 2.276 (2.298)
    Max 104.828 82.902 104.828
    SD 11.664 8.981 7.088
    Drugs Min 0 0 0
    Median (Mean) 13.430 (26.228) 7.673 (17.385) 5.757 (8.843)
    Max 421.316 261.516 421.316
    SD 42.207 30.454 25.705
    Bed Min 0 0 0
    Median (Mean) 4.600 (8.710) 0 (3.131) 4.600 (5.579)
    Max 163.800 60.105 163.800
    SD 12.731 7.209 10.502
    Total Inpatient Expenditure Min 33.630 0 0
    Median (Mean) 62.959 (96.575) 50.000 (76.633) 12.959 (19.942)
    Max 1121.015 867.245 896.015
    SD 111.012 83.890 50.716

    Source: Present study.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The median expenditure incurred for the packages across cardiac patients is zero. However, the average cost is reported to be ₹6836. Health insurance has covered around 98 percent (mean = ₹6760) of the cost incurred for the treatment packages. For services, patients incurred a median expenditure of ₹31,905, out of which health insurance coverage stands at a median cost of ₹29,915. A similar trend is observed for the cost incurred for materials, drugs, and patient bed charges. Total median costs incurred for drugs purchased by inpatients are reported to be ₹13,430, 2.7 times the median cost incurred for materials (₹4931) and 2.9 times for beds (₹4600). The patient median bed cost is notably higher than other categories (₹4600).

    We examined the relationship between key patient characteristics and coverage amount, THC and OOPE. Spearman rank order correlation [43] was used for LOS and age characteristics, whereas Kendall's Tau [43] was used for disease types and gender. The results are presented in Table 6.

    Table 6.  Association between patient profile and healthcare expenditures.
    Indicators Coverage amount (ρ) TIE (ρ) OOPE (ρ)
    Length of stay 0.266 (<0.001) 0.202 (<0.001) 0.139 (<0.001)
    Age 0.011 (0.789) 0.021 (0.583) −0.036 (0.355)
    Disease −0.137 (<0.001) −0.061 (<0.078) 0.034 (0.321)
    Gender 0.033 (0.401) −0.002 (0.958) −0.009 (0.824)

    Source: Present study.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    LOS is a pertinent patient characteristic, which is subjected to varies with disease pattern, comorbidities and age characteristics. The relationships between LOS and the coverage amount (r = 0.266; ρ < 0.001), TIE (r = 0.202; ρ < 0.001) and OOPE (r = 0.139; ρ < 0.001) turn out to be statistically significant. It is also understood that these correlation coefficients indicate negligible correlations between the variables of reference. The relationship between age and other cost variables such as coverage amount, total hospital costs and OOPE is found to be statistically insignificant. Similarly, a significant relationship is highlighted between type of diseases and coverage amount (r = −0.137; ρ = < 0.001). The analysis also reflected a statistically non-significant association between gender and coverage amount (ρ = 0.401), TIE (ρ = 0.958) and OOPE (ρ = 0.824).

    We provide crucial information regarding the role of private health insurance in healthcare costs. The existence of minimal protection of health expenditure highlights the overt prevalence of OOPE among private health insurance holders. This is due to the partial coverage, excluding the cost incurred for inpatient services. Moreover, it is observed that the reimbursement towards bed costs in the TIE, according to the policies, is 30 percent. In addition, most patients received only 70 percent of the TIE through reimbursement. Upon examining the relative inpatient expenditure incurred for disease conditions, we identify the sway of cardiac disease in TIE.

    One of the major findings in this research is the unraveling of the underinsurance of hospitalized patients. This questions the awareness and knowledge of health insurance holders while purchasing an optimum policy scheme, on the one hand, and its mis-selling of suboptimal policies on the other. Our results concur with Prinja [6], Erlanga [44], and Sommers [45] regarding the incidence of underinsurance among PFHI holders and with Vellakkeel [13] regarding private health insurance. The major causes of underinsurance among private health insurance holders, reported by Adrion [46] and Chhabra [14], include the highest cost-sharing (premiums, coinsurance, and co-payments) and unexpected outpatient costs. Though we could not extract the cost-sharing perspective of health insurance plans, the impact of partial reimbursement, in aggravating the severity of OOPE, is depicted in our study.

    Our findings on the underinsurance phenomenon direct our attention to a few studies on the consequences of underinsurance sans space-time [14],[44],[46],[47]. Link [47] has reported the prevalence of co-morbidities and depression due to underinsurance among lower wealth quintiles and Hispanic blacks across the United States. Robertson [48] highlighted the possibility of overconsumption of healthcare and wastage, triggering under-insurance among health insurance holders.

    Our study offers empirical evidence to the foregoing observations; the hike in bed costs is due to upgradation with an assumption of full health coverage and prolonged stay in intensive care units. There may be a lack of consumer health insurance literacy prior to purchasing a healthcare package, as indicated by the outcomes. Researchers have suggested that improving health insurance literacy could optimize healthcare utilization and avoid unnecessary healthcare-seeking costs [49].

    We have identified a considerable share of bed costs for OOPE among healthcare seekers. Scholars have communicated similar findings by exposing the superiority of non-medical costs in the economic burden of diseases [50],[51]. We have noticed that prolonged ICU stays and partial coverage of bed costs by health insurance schemes have shot up healthcare costs. The partial coverage of bed cost is due to the upgradation of inpatient bed facilities from the fully covered basic level inpatient room (general ward) to deluxe or super deluxe rooms by patients. Reddy [52] has discussed similar observations in different settings.

    Assessing the cost trends in healthcare seeking across the disease conditions reflects a higher burden of inpatient expenditure among patients hospitalized with cardiac diseases (median = ₹145,468). Our study fortifies the findings of past studies on cardiac patients' financial burden, which notify that the hike in inpatient expenditure accounted for higher costs incurred for human resources and capital expenses of hospitals [6],[53]. We observed that the patients seek admission to general wards and later get shifted to private rooms. This leads to excess inpatient expenditure incurred due to the upgrade of inpatient bed facilities, which contributes to a certain percentage of the increase in the cost of all other services they availed. Hence, the overall treatment cost is escalated, which adds to their healthcare burden.

    Our study has the following limitations. First, we have included inpatient healthcare expenditure incurred for a specific episode of illness. This cannot predict the total economic burden experienced by private health insurance holders. For example, a patient might have been admitted to the hospital multiple times yearly due to co-morbidity or medical complications. The current study covers only one hospitalization episode for one patient. Hence, we do not claim to have covered the comprehensive OOPE of a patient. Second, the reimbursement amount varies according to the sub-schemes the health insurance provides, which is not considered. However, the analysis highlights a macroscopic view of the coverage and coverage limitations of private health insurance under each cost category. Fourth, the data were extracted from a multispecialty tertiary teaching hospital, limiting the generalization of the findings.

    In light of this study, we propose a few future research directions. We have mentioned elsewhere the effectiveness of combinations of multiple interventions in reducing OOPE [54],[55]. Hence, researchers can investigate the question: Can the combination of non-insurance methods and private health insurance eliminate OOPE?

    Similarly, countries have identified the benefits of private health insurance as a supplementary means of increasing coverage among the population [56],[57]. In addition, countries such as India report OOPE among PFHI holders [6]. In this regard, researchers can seek answers to the following research questions: What are the possibilities of increasing private health insurance penetration among partially insured individuals across lower and middle-income countries? What are the strategies adopted for the co-existence of both the insurance sectors – Public and private?

    Though momentum is observed in the private health insurance market, whether it improves the volume of healthcare utilization, accessibility to healthcare, and overall population health requires further research. Therefore, future studies can be initiated to answer the following questions: What is the role of private health insurance in propelling health-seeking behavior? How far has health insurance been able to attain the existing healthcare delivery issues such as equity, accessibility, and affordability? What is the role of private health insurance in accelerating the goal of Universal Health Coverage? Do private health insurance holders experience any regret about the choice of policy? What is the level of health insurance literacy among private health insurance holders? What are the strategies to improve health insurance literacy among the population? Do consumers have any validated sources to identify an optimum health plan? How can we confluence health insurance schemes under private health insurance? Why are the insurance companies hesitant to embark on a shared-value insurance model?

    We investigated the role of private health insurance in providing coverage against healthcare costs. We used billing information of patients hospitalized with private health insurance in a tertiary care multi-speciality hospital for one year. We appraised the coverage pattern of private health insurance under various cost heads. We found that the health insurance fails to provide full coverage, leading to under-insurance, though minimal financial protection is present. We have also identified less coverage for bed costs, resulting in OOPE. Patients' difficulty in choosing an optimum health insurance covering the out-patient cost is also highlighted. As per the authors' knowledge, this is the first attempt to exhibit the role of private health insurance in patients' health care costs using a pool of billing and insurance reimbursement data from a service provider. This strengthens the credibility of our findings compared to the results obtained from large-scale national sample surveys and provides the existing trend of private health insurance's role in providing coverage. We conclude by discussing campaigning for a suitable policy regime to set out an appropriate shared-value insurance model to ameliorate the underinsurance issue and devastating OOPE.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.


    Acknowledgments



    We thank Razmin Bari for critical reading of the manuscript. There was no funding for this work.

    Conflict of interest



    There is no conflict of interest.

    [1] Zhu N, Zhang D, Wang W, et al. (2020) A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med 382: 727-733. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
    [2] WHO (2020)  WHO Director-General's remarks at the media briefing on 2019-nCoV on 11 February 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-2019-ncov-on-11-february-2020?fbclid=IwAR0sM8rI7GuBH_-xJ9BC7NQy-wy4hWENuparYis8zbupVNSLTq34h4yZZR4.
    [3] WHO (2020)  Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Available from: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf[/BCOLOR].
    [4] WHO (2020)  Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005). Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov).
    [5] Worldometer (2020)  COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Available from: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/.
    [6] Sáez L (2012)  The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC): An emerging collaboration architecture Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203808801
    [7] O'Rourke B (2003)  South Asia: Afghanistan Joins World's Largest Regional Grouping. Available from: https://www.rferl.org/a/1075660.html.
    [8] Coccia M (2020) Factors determining the diffusion of COVID-19 and suggested strategy to prevent future accelerated viral infectivity similar to COVID. Sci Total Environ 729: 138474. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138474
    [9] Saadat S, Deepak R, Chaudhery MH (2020) Environmental perspective of COVID-19. Sci Total Environ 728: 138870. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138870
    [10] Thomala LL (2020) Age distribution of COVID-19 patients in China 2020. Health Pharm Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1095024/china-age-distribution-of-wuhan-coronavirus-covid-19-patients/.
    [11] Rapid Risk Assessment (2020)  Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the EU/EEA and the UK–eighth update. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19-rapid-risk-assessment-coronavirus-disease-2019-eighth-update-8-april-2020.pdf.
    [12] IndexMundi India vs. Pakistan/Country Comparison. Available from: https://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/india.pakistan/demographics.
    [13] IndexMundi Bangladesh Demographics Profile 2019. Available from: https://www.indexmundi.com/bangladesh/demographics_profile.html .
    [14] Bialek GR, Hughes M, McNamara PT, et al. (2020) Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Children-United States. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 69: 422-426. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6914e4
    [15] Zhu Y, Xie J (2020) Association between ambient temperature and COVID-19 infection in 122 cities from China. Sci Total Environ 724: 138201. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138201
    [16] (2020) National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and MedicineRapid Expert Consultation on SARS-CoV-2 Survival in Relation to Temperature and Humidity and Potential for Seasonality for the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17226/25771.
    [17] Saglietto A, D'Ascenzo F, Zoccai GB, et al. (2020) COVID-19 in Europe: the Italian lesson. Lancet 395: 1110-1111. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30690-5
    [18] Deyshappriya NRR (2018)  Examining poverty trends in South Asian countries: where is Sri Lanka among its South Asian counterparts?. Available from: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2018/07/31/examining-poverty-trends-in-south-asian-countries-where-is-sri-lanka-among-its-south-asian-counterparts/.
    [19] Wu JT, Leung K, Leung GM (2020) Now casting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study. Lancet 395: 689-697. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30260-9
    [20] WHO (2020)  Afghanistan. Brief: COVID-19. Available from: https://reliefwebint/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/daily_brief_covid-19_23_march_2020.pdf.
    [21] Tran BX, Dang AK, Thai PK, et al. (2020) Coverage of Health Information by Different Sources in Communities: Implication for COVID-19 Epidemic Response. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17: 3577. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17103577
    [22] Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, et al. (2020) A Longitudinal Study on the Mental Health of General Population during the COVID-19 Epidemic in China. Brain Behav Immun 87: 40-48. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.028
    [23] Sun K, Chen J, Viboud C (2020) Early epidemiological analysis of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak based on crowdsourced data: a population-level observational study. Lancet Digit Health 2: e201-e208. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30026-1
    [24] Tan W, Hao F, McIntyre RS, et al. (2020) Is Returning to Work during the COVID-19 Pandemic Stressful? A Study on Immediate Mental Health Status and Psychoneuroimmunity Prevention Measures of Chinese Workforce. Brain Behav Immun 87: 84-92. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.055
    [25] Kim SW, Su KP (2020) Using psychoneuroimmunity against COVID-19. Brain Behav Immun 87: 4-5. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.03.025
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2020 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(6235) PDF downloads(353) Cited by(14)

Figures and Tables

Tables(1)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog