The Out-of-Pocket Cost Burden of Cancer Care—A Systematic Literature Review

Background: Out-of-pocket costs pose a substantial economic burden to cancer patients and their families. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the literature on out-of-pocket costs of cancer care. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies that estimated the out-of-pocket cost burden faced by cancer patients and their caregivers. The average monthly out-of-pocket costs per patient were reported/estimated and converted to 2018 USD. Costs were reported as medical and non-medical costs and were reported across countries or country income levels by cancer site, where possible, and category. The out-of-pocket burden was estimated as the average proportion of income spent as non-reimbursable costs. Results: Among all cancers, adult patients and caregivers in the U.S. spent between USD 180 and USD 2600 per month, compared to USD 15–400 in Canada, USD 4–609 in Western Europe, and USD 58–438 in Australia. Patients with breast or colorectal cancer spent around USD 200 per month, while pediatric cancer patients spent USD 800. Patients spent USD 288 per month on cancer medications in the U.S. and USD 40 in other high-income countries (HICs). The average costs for medical consultations and in-hospital care were estimated between USD 40–71 in HICs. Cancer patients and caregivers spent 42% and 16% of their annual income on out-of-pocket expenses in low- and middle-income countries and HICs, respectively. Conclusions: We found evidence that cancer is associated with high out-of-pocket costs. Healthcare systems have an opportunity to improve the coverage of medical and non-medical costs for cancer patients to help alleviate this burden and ensure equitable access to care

Impact of cigarette tax increase on health and financing outcomes in four Indian states

This paper examines the impact on health and financing outcomes of a large one-time cigarette price hike through an increase in excise tax. Results of calculations show with the price increase, about 1.5 million men would quit smoking across the four states, with the bottom income group having 7.4 times as many quitters as the top income group. The study examines the impact of tobacco tax increase across income groups at the subnational level in four Indian states: Kharnataka, Assam, Uttar Pradesh, and Maharashtra.Bill and Melinda Gates FoundationCancer Research U

inVestIgating the pSychologIcal and ecONomic impAct of cataRact surgerY in Vietnam: The VISIONARY observational study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Visual impairment caused by cataracts not only affects an individual's quality of life but can also have a profound impact on other important psychological factors and on the economic circumstances of individuals and their households. Cataract surgery is an effective intervention to restore vision and is also associated with other positive consequences including improvements in quality of life, economic and psychological outcomes. While there has been an increase in the number and quality of cataract surgeries performed in Vietnam, the programs currently in place are still unable to meet the existing demand and need for surgery. Data on both the cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery and the economic and psychological impact of untreated cataract in this setting is lacking.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This study, investigating the psychological and economic impact of cataract surgery in Vietnam (VISIONARY), will recruit and interview a sample of adults (18 years or over) who are referred for cataract surgery by one of the following sites and their outreach programs: Hue Eye Hospital; Thai Binh Eye Hospital; Binh Dinh Department of Health Eye Hospital and the Vinh Long Department of Health Social Disease Centre. All participants (those who have cataract surgery and those who do not have surgery) will be followed up at six and 12 months.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study is designed to examine the impact of low vision on household economic circumstances and psychological outcomes as well as to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery in Vietnam. It will help to inform international and national non-government organisations working in the country and local policy-makers on priorities for further investment in eye-health services in this setting and their relevance to broader economic development goals.</p

The psychosocial cost burden of cancer : A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Psychosocial costs, or quality of life costs, account for psychological distress, pain, suffering and other negative experiences associated with cancer. They contribute to the overall economic burden of cancer that patients experience. But this category of costs remains poorly understood. This hinders opportunities to make the best cancer control policy decisions. This study explored the psychosocial cost burden associated with cancer, how studies measure psychosocial costs and the impact of this burden. METHODS: A systematic literature review of academic and grey literature published from 2008 to 2018 was conducted by searching electronic databases, guided by the Institute of Medicine's conceptualization of psychosocial burden. Results were analyzed using a narrative synthesis and a weighted proportion of populations affected was calculated. Study quality was assessed using the Ottawa-Newcastle instrument. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies were included. There was variation in how psychosocial costs were conceptualized and an inconsistent approach to measurement. Most studies measured social dimensions and focused on the financial consequences of paying for care. Fewer studies assessed costs associated with the other domains of this burden, including psychological, physical, and spiritual dimensions. Fourty-four percent of cancer populations studied were impacted by psychosocial costs and this varied by disease site (38%-71%). Two studies monetized the psychosocial cost burden, estimating a lifetime cost per case ranging from CAD$427753 to CAD$528769. Studies were of varying quality; 60% of cross-sectional studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Consistency in approach to measurement would help to elevate this issue for researchers and decision makers. At two-thirds of the total economic burden of cancer, economic evaluations should account for psychosocial costs to better inform decision-making. More support is needed to address the psychosocial cost burden faced by patients and their families

Economic hardship associated with managing chronic illness: a qualitative inquiry

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chronic illness and disability can have damaging, even catastrophic, socioeconomic effects on individuals and their households. We examined the experiences of people affected by chronic heart failure, complicated diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to inform patient centred policy development. This paper provides a first level, qualitative understanding of the economic impact of chronic illness.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Interviews were conducted with patients aged between 45 and 85 years who had one or more of the index conditions and family carers from the Australian Capital Territory and Western Sydney, Australia (n = 66). Content analysis guided the interpretation of data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The affordability of medical treatments and care required to manage illness were identified as the key aspects of economic hardship, which compromised patients' capacity to proactively engage in self-management and risk reduction behaviours. Factors exacerbating hardship included ineligibility for government support, co-morbidity, health service flexibility, and health literacy. Participants who were on multiple medications, from culturally and linguistically diverse or Indigenous backgrounds, and/or not in paid employment, experienced economic hardship more harshly and their management of chronic illness was jeopardised as a consequence. Economic hardship was felt among not only those ineligible for government financial supports but also those receiving subsidies that were insufficient to meet the costs of managing long-term illness over and above necessary daily living expenses.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This research provides insights into the economic stressors associated with managing chronic illness, demonstrating that economic hardship requires households to make difficult decisions between care and basic living expenses. These decisions may cause less than optimal health outcomes and increased costs to the health system. The findings support the necessity of a critical analysis of health, social and welfare policies to identify cross-sectoral strategies to alleviate such hardship and improve the affordability of managing chronic conditions. In a climate of global economic instability, research into the economic impact of chronic illness on individuals' health and well-being and their disease management capacity, such as this study, provides timely evidence to inform policy development.</p

The unfunded priorities: an evaluation of priority setting for noncommunicable disease control in Uganda

Abstract Background The double burden of infectious diseases coupled with noncommunicable diseases poses unique challenges for priority setting and for achieving equitable action to address the major causes of disease burden in health systems already impacted by limited resources. Noncommunicable disease control is an important global health and development priority. However, there are challenges for translating this global priority into local priorities and action. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of national, sub-national and global factors on priority setting for noncommunicable disease control in Uganda and examine the extent to which priority setting was successful. Methods A mixed methods design that used the Kapiriri & Martin framework for evaluating priority setting in low income countries. The evaluation period was 2005–2015. Data collection included a document review (policy documents (n = 19); meeting minutes (n = 28)), media analysis (n = 114) and stakeholder interviews (n = 9). Data were analysed according to the Kapiriri & Martin (2010) framework. Results Priority setting for noncommunicable diseases was not entirely fair nor successful. While there were explicit processes that incorporated relevant criteria, evidence and wide stakeholder involvement, these criteria were not used systematically or consistently in the contemplation of noncommunicable diseases. There were insufficient resources for noncommunicable diseases, despite being a priority area. There were weaknesses in the priority setting institutions, and insufficient mechanisms to ensure accountability for decision-making. Priority setting was influenced by the priorities of major stakeholders (i.e. development assistance partners) which were not always aligned with national priorities. There were major delays in the implementation of noncommunicable disease-related priorities and in many cases, a failure to implement. Conclusions This evaluation revealed the challenges that low income countries are grappling with in prioritizing noncommunicable diseases in the context of a double disease burden with limited resources. Strengthening local capacity for priority setting would help to support the development of sustainable and implementable noncommunicable disease-related priorities. Global support (i.e. aid) to low income countries for noncommunicable diseases must also catch up to align with NCDs as a global health priority