58 research outputs found

    Lessons from the Thai Health Promotion Foundation.

    Get PDF
    To facilitate the policy response to noncommunicable diseases in Thailand, parliament adopted the Health Promotion Foundation Act in 2001. This Act led to the establishment of an autonomous government body, the Thai Health Promotion Foundation, called ThaiHealth. The foundation receives its revenue from a 2% surcharge of excise taxes on tobacco and alcohol. The fund supports evidence generation, campaigns and social mobilization to address noncommunicable disease risk factors, such as tobacco-use, harmful use of alcohol and sedentary behaviour. On average, its annual revenue is 120 million United States dollars (US$). Some notable ThaiHealth-supported public campaigns are for schools free of sweetened carbonated beverages; alcohol abstinence during three-month Buddhist lent; and nationwide physical activity. The percentage of people using tobacco decreased from 22.5% in 2001 to 18.2% in 2014. The annual per capita alcohol consumption decreased from 8.1Ā litres pure alcohol in 2005 to 6.9Ā litres in 2014. The percentage of the adult population doing at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity or 75 minutes high-intensity aerobic exercise per week, increased from 66.3% in 2012 to 72.9% in 2017. A dedicated funding mechanism, a transparent and accountable organization, and the engagement of civil society organizations and other government agencies have enabled ThaiHealth to run these campaigns

    Strategic purchasing and health system efficiency: A comparison of two financing schemes in Thailand.

    Get PDF
    Strategic purchasing is an essential health financing function. This paper compares the strategic purchasing practices of Thailand's two tax-financed health insurance schemes, the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) and the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS), and identifies factors contributing to successful universal health coverage outcomes by analysing the relationships between the purchaser and government, providers and members. The study uses a cross-sectional mixed-methods design, including document review and interviews with 56 key informants. The Comptroller General Department (CGD) of Ministry of Finance manages CSMBS as one among civil servant welfare programmes. Their purchasing is passive. Fee for service payment for outpatient care has resulted in rapid cost escalation and overspending of their annual budget. In contrast, National Health Security Office (NHSO) manages purchasing for UCS, which undertakes a range of strategic purchasing actions, including applying closed ended provider payment, promoting primary healthcare's gate keeping functions, exercising collective purchasing power and engaging views of members in decision making process. This difference in purchasing arrangements resulted in expenditure per CSMBS member being 4 times higher than UCS in 2014. The governance of the purchaser organization, the design of the purchasing arrangements including incentives and use of information, and the institutional capacities to implement purchasing functions are essential for effective strategic purchasing which can improve health system efficiency as a whole

    Policy Choices for Progressive Realization of Universal Health Coverage Comment on "Ethical Perspective: Five Unacceptable Trade-offs on the Path to Universal Health Coverage".

    Get PDF
    In responses to Norheim's editorial, this commentary offers reflections from Thailand, how the five unacceptable trade-offs were applied to the universal health coverage (UHC) reforms between 1975 and 2002 when the whole 64 million people were covered by one of the three public health insurance systems. This commentary aims to generate global discussions on how best UHC can be gradually achieved. Not only the proposed five discrete trade-offs within each dimension, there are also trade-offs between the three dimensions of UHC such as population coverage, service coverage and cost coverage. Findings from Thai UHC show that equity is applied for the population coverage extension, when the low income households and the informal sector were the priority population groups for coverage extension by different prepayment schemes in 1975 and 1984, respectively. With an exception of public sector employees who were historically covered as part of fringe benefits were covered well before the poor. The private sector employees were covered last in 1990. Historically, Thailand applied a comprehensive benefit package where a few items are excluded using the negative list; until there was improved capacities on technology assessment that cost-effectiveness are used for the inclusion of new interventions into the benefit package. Not only cost-effectiveness, but long term budget impact, equity and ethical considerations are taken into account. Cost coverage is mostly determined by the fiscal capacities. Close ended budget with mix of provider payment methods are used as a tool for trade-off service coverage and financial risk protection. Introducing copayment in the context of fee-for-service can be harmful to beneficiaries due to supplier induced demands, inefficiency and unpredictable out of pocket payment by households. UHC achieves favorable outcomes as it was implemented when there was a full geographical coverage of primary healthcare coverage in all districts and sub-districts after three decade of health infrastructure investment and health workforce development since 1980s. The legacy of targeting population group by different prepayment mechanisms, leading to fragmentation, discrepancies and inequity across schemes, can be rectified by harmonization at the early phase when these schemes were introduced. Robust public accountability and participation mechanisms are recommended when deciding the UHC strategy

    A framework for comparative analysis of health systems: experiences from the Asia Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies

    Get PDF
    Drawing on published work from the Asia Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, this paper presents a framework for undertaking comparative studies on the health systems of countries. Organized under seven types of research approaches, such as national case-studies using a common format, this framework is illustrated using studies of low- and middle-income countries published by the Asia Pacific Observatory. Such studies are important contributions, since much of the health systems research literature comes from high-income countries. No one research approach, however, can adequately analyse a health system, let alone produce a nuanced comparison of different countries. Multiple comparative studies offer a better understanding, as a health system is a complex entity to describe and analyse. Appreciation of context and culture is crucial: what works in one country may not do so in another. Further, a single research method, such as performance indicators, or a study of a particular health system function or component, produces only a partial picture. Applying a comparative framework of several study approaches helps to inform and explain progress against health system targets, to identify differences among countries, and to assess policies and programmes. Multi-method comparative research produces policy-relevant learning that can assist countries to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3: ensure healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages by 2030

    Policy Choices for Progressive Realization of Universal Health Coverage Comment on ā€œEthical Perspective: Five Unacceptable Trade-offs on the Path to Universal Health Coverageā€

    Get PDF
    In responses to Norheimā€™s editorial, this commentary offers reflections from Thailand, how the five unacceptable trade-offs were applied to the universal health coverage (UHC) reforms between 1975 and 2002 when the whole 64 million people were covered by one of the three public health insurance systems. This commentary aims to generate global discussions on how best UHC can be gradually achieved. Not only the proposed five discrete trade-offs within each dimension, there are also trade-offs between the three dimensions of UHC such as population coverage, service coverage and cost coverage. Findings from Thai UHC show that equity is applied for the population coverage extension, when the low income households and the informal sector were the priority population groups for coverage extension by different prepayment schemes in 1975 and 1984, respectively. With an exception of public sector employees who were historically covered as part of fringe benefits were covered well before the poor. The private sector employees were covered last in 1990. Historically, Thailand applied a comprehensive benefit package where a few items are excluded using the negative list; until there was improved capacities on technology assessment that cost-effectiveness are used for the inclusion of new interventions into the benefit package. Not only cost-effectiveness, but long term budget impact, equity and ethical considerations are taken into account. Cost coverage is mostly determined by the fiscal capacities. Close ended budget with mix of provider payment methods are used as a tool for trade-off service coverage and financial risk protection. Introducing copayment in the context of fee-for-service can be harmful to beneficiaries due to supplier induced demands, inefficiency and unpredictable out of pocket payment by households. UHC achieves favorable outcomes as it was implemented when there was a full geographical coverage of primary healthcare coverage in all districts and sub-districts after three decade of health infrastructure investment and health workforce development since 1980s. The legacy of targeting population group by different prepayment mechanisms, leading to fragmentation, discrepancies and inequity across schemes, can be rectified by harmonization at the early phase when these schemes were introduced. Robust public accountability and participation mechanisms are recommended when deciding the UHC strategy

    Health systems development in Thailand: a solid platform for successful implementation of universal health coverage.

    Get PDF
    Thailand's health development since the 1970s has been focused on investment in the health delivery infrastructure at the district level and below and on training the health workforce. Deliberate policies increased domestic training capacities for all cadres of health personnel and distributed them to rural and underserved areas. Since 1975, targeted insurance schemes for different population groups have improved financial access to health care until universal health coverage was implemented in 2002. Despite its low gross national income per capita in Thailand, a bold decision was made to use general taxation to finance the Universal Health Coverage Scheme without relying on contributions from members. Empirical evidence shows substantial reduction in levels of out-of-pocket payments, the incidence of catastrophic health spending, and in medical impoverishment. The scheme has also greatly reduced provincial gaps in child mortality. Certain interventions such as antiretroviral therapy and renal replacement therapy have saved the lives of adults. Well designed strategic purchasing contributed to efficiency, cost containment, and equity. Remaining challenges include preparing for an ageing society, primary prevention of non-communicable diseases, law enforcement to prevent road traffic mortality, and effective coverage of diabetes and tuberculosis control

    Promoting universal financial protection: how the Thai universal coverage scheme was designed to ensure equity.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence demonstrates that the Thai Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) has improved equity of health financing and provided a relatively high level of financial risk protection. Several UCS design features contribute to these outcomes: a tax-financed scheme, a comprehensive benefit package and gradual extension of coverage to illnesses that can lead to catastrophic household costs, and capacity of the National Health Security Office (NHSO) to mobilise adequate resources. This study assesses the policy processes related to making decisions on these features. METHODS: The study employs qualitative methods including reviews of relevant documents, in-depth interviews of 25 key informants, and triangulation amongst information sources. RESULTS: Continued political and financial commitments to the UCS, despite political rivalry, played a key role. The Thai Rak Thai (TRT)-led coalition government introduced UCS; staying in power 8 of the 11 years between 2001 and 2011 was long enough to nurture and strengthen the UCS and overcome resistance from various opponents. Prime Minister Surayud's government, replacing the ousted TRT government, introduced universal renal replacement therapy, which deepened financial risk protection.Commitment to their manifesto and fiscal capacity pushed the TRT to adopt a general tax-financed universal scheme; collecting premiums from people engaged in the informal sector was neither politically palatable nor technically feasible. The relatively stable tenure of NHSO Secretary Generals and the chairs of the Financing and the Benefit Package subcommittees provided a platform for continued deepening of financial risk protection. NHSO exerted monopsonistic purchasing power to control prices, resulting in greater patient access and better systems efficiency than might have been the case with a different design.The approach of proposing an annual per capita budget changed the conventional line-item programme budgeting system by basing negotiations between the Bureau of Budget, the NHSO and other stakeholders on evidence of service utilization and unit costs. CONCLUSIONS: Future success of Thai UCS requires coverage of effective interventions that address primary and secondary prevention of non-communicable diseases and long-term care policies in view of epidemiologic and demographic transitions. Lessons for other countries include the importance of continued political support, evidence informed decisions, and a capable purchaser organization

    Multisectoral Actions for Health: Challenges and Opportunities in Complex Policy Environments

    Get PDF
    Multisectoral actions for health, defined as actions undertaken by non-health sectors to protect the health of the population, are essential in the context of inter-linkages between three dimensions of sustainable development: economic, social, and environmental. These multisectoral actions can address the social and economic factors that influence the health of a population at the local, national, and global levels. This editorial identifies the challenges, opportunities and capacity development for effective multisectoral actions for health in a complex policy environment. The root causes of the challenges lie in poor governance such as entrenched political and administrative corruption, widespread clientelism, lack of citizen voice, weak social capital, lack of trust and lack of respect for human rights. This is further complicated by the lack of government effectiveness caused by poor capacity for strong public financial management and low levels of transparency and accountability which leads to corruption. The absence of or rapid changes in government policies, and low salary in relation to living standards result in migration out of qualified staff. Tobacco, alcohol and sugary drink industries are major risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and had interfered with health policy through regulatory capture and potential law suits against the government. Opportunities still exist. Some World Health Assembly (WHA) and United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions are both considered as external driving forces for intersectoral actions for health. In addition, Thailand National Health Assembly under the National Health Act is another tool providing opportunity to form trust among stakeholders from different sectors. Capacity development at individual, institutional and system level to generate evidence and ensure it is used by multisectoral agencies is as critical as strengthening the health literacy of people and the overall good governance of a country

    Strategic Purchasing: The Neglected Health Financing Function for Pursuing Universal Health Coverage in Low-and Middle-Income Countries Comment on "What's Needed to Develop Strategic Purchasing in Healthcare? Policy Lessons from a Realist Review".

    Get PDF
    Sanderson et al's realist review of strategic purchasing identifies insights from two strands of theory: the economics of organisation and inter-organisational relationships. Our findings from a programme of research conducted by the RESYST (Resilient and Responsive Health Systems) consortium in seven countries echo these results, and add to them the crucial area of organisational capacity to implement complex reforms. We identify key areas for policy development. These are the need for: (1) a policy design with clearly delineated responsibilities; (2) a task network of organisations to engage in the broad set of functions needed; (3) more effective means of engaging with populations; (4) a range of technical and management capacities; and (5) an awareness of the multiple agency relationships that are created by the broader financing environment and the provider incentives generated by multiple financing flows
    • ā€¦
    corecore