Publication:
Copayment and recommended strategies to mitigate its impacts on access to emergency medical services under universal health coverage: A case study from Thailand

dc.contributor.authorPaibul Suriyawongpaisalen_US
dc.contributor.authorWichai Aekplakornen_US
dc.contributor.authorSamrit Srithamrongsawaten_US
dc.contributor.authorChaisit Srithongchaien_US
dc.contributor.authorOrawan Prasitsiriphonen_US
dc.contributor.authorRassamee Tansirisithikulen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T03:21:10Z
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-14T08:02:01Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T03:21:10Z
dc.date.available2019-03-14T08:02:01Z
dc.date.issued2016-10-21en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2016 The Author(s). Background: Although bodies of evidence on copayment effects on access to care and quality of care in general have not been conclusive, allowing copayment in the case of emergency medical conditions might pose a high risk of delayed treatment leading to avoidable disability or death. Methods: Using mixed-methods approach to draw evidence from multiple sources (over 40,000 records of administrative dataset of Thai emergency medical services, in-depth interviews, telephone survey of users and documentary review), we are were able to shed light on the existence of copayment and its related factors in the Thai healthcare system despite the presence of universal health coverage since 2001. Results: The copayment poses a barrier of access to emergency care delivered by private hospitals despite the policy proclaiming free access and payment. The copayment differentially affects beneficiaries of the major 3 public-health insurance schemes hence inducing inequity of access. Conclusions: We have identified 6 drivers of the copayment i.e., 1) perceived under payment, 2) unclear operational definitions of emergency conditions or 3) lack of criteria to justify inter-hospital transfer after the first 72 h of admission, 4) limited understanding by the service users of the policy-directed benefits, 5) weak regulatory mechanism as indicated by lack of information systems to trace private provider's practices, and 6) ineffective arrangements for inter-hospital transfer. With demand-side perspectives, we addressed the reasons for bypassing gatekeepers or assigned local hospitals. These are the perception of inferior quality of care and age-related tendency to use emergency department, which indicate a deficit in the current healthcare systems under universal health coverage. Finally, we have discussed strategies to address these potential drivers of copayment and needs for further studies.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBMC Health Services Research. Vol.16, No.1 (2016)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12913-016-1847-yen_US
dc.identifier.issn14726963en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84992222185en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/41090
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84992222185&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleCopayment and recommended strategies to mitigate its impacts on access to emergency medical services under universal health coverage: A case study from Thailanden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84992222185&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections