BackgroundApproximately 150 million people suffer from financial catastrophe annually because of out-of-pocket expenditures (OOPEs) on health. Although the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) of Ghana was designed to promote universal health coverage, OOPEs as a proportion of total health expenditures remains elevated at 26%, exceeding the WHO’s recommendations of less than 15–20%. To determine whether enrollment in the NHIS reduces the likelihood of OOPEs and catastrophic health expenditures (CHEs) in Ghana, we undertook a systematic review of the published literature.MethodsWe searched for quantitative articles published in English between January 1, 2003 and August 22, 2017 in PubMed, Google Scholar, Economic Literature, Global Health, PAIS International, and African Index Medicus. Two independent authors (J.S.O. & S.E.) reviewed the articles for inclusion, extracted the data, and conducted a quality assessment of the studies. We accepted the World Health Organization definition of catastrophic health expenditures which is out of pocket payments for health care which exceeds 20% of annual house hold income, 10% of household expenditures, or 40% of subsistence expenditures (total household expenditures net food expenditures).ResultsOf the 1094 articles initially identified, 7 were eligible for inclusion. These were cross-sectional household studies published between 2008 and 2016 in Ghana. They demonstrated that the uninsured paid 1.4 to 10 times more in out-of-pocket payments (OOPs) and were more likely to incur CHEs than the insured. Yet, 6 to 18% of insured households made catastrophic payments for healthcare and all studies reported insured members making OOPs for medicines.ConclusionEvidence suggests that the national health insurance scheme of Ghana over the last 14 years has made some impact on reducing OOPEs, and yet healthcare costs remain catastrophic for a large proportion of insured households in Ghana. Future studies need to explore reasons for the persistence of OOPs for medicines and services that are covered under the scheme.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3249-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: According to the World Health Organization, essential surgery should be recognized as an essential component of universal health coverage. In Ghana, insurance is associated with a reduction in maternal mortality and improved access to essential medications, but whether it eliminates financial barriers to surgery is unknown. This study tested the hypothesis that insurance protects surgical patients against financial catastrophe. Methods: We interviewed patients admitted to the general surgery wards of Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH) between February 1, 2017-October 1, 2017 to obtain demographic data, income, occupation, household expenditures, and insurance status. Surgical diagnoses and procedures, procedural fees, and anesthesia fees incurred were collected through chart review. The data were collected on a Qualtrics platform and analyzed in STATA version 14.1. Fisher exact and Student T-tests were used to compare the insured and uninsured groups. Threshold for financial catastrophe was defined as health costs that exceeded 10% of household expenditures, 40% of non-food expenditures, or 20% of the individual's income. Results: Among 196 enrolled patients, insured patients were slightly older [mean 49 years vs 40 years P < 0.05] and more of them were female [65% vs 41% p < 0.05]. Laparotomy (22.2%) was the most common surgical procedure for both groups. Depending on the definition, 58-87% of insured patients would face financial catastrophe, versus 83-98% of uninsured patients (all comparisons by definition were significant, p < .05). Conclusion: This study-the first to evaluate the impact of insurance on financial risk protection for surgical patients in Ghana-found that although insured patients were less likely than uninsured to face financial catastrophe as a result of their surgery, more than half of insured surgical patients treated at KBTH were not protected from financial catastrophe under the Ghana's national health insurance scheme due to out-of-pocket payments. Government-specific strategies to increase the proportion of cost covered and to enroll the uninsured is crucial to achieving universal health coverage inclusive of surgical care. Trial registration: Registered at www.clinical trials.gov identifier NCT03604458.

To our knowledge, this is the first methodological review of racial/ethnic disparities in patient safety in the United States. The evidence on the existence of disparities in adverse events was mixed. Poor stratification of outcomes by race/ethnicity and consideration of geographic and hospital-level variations explain the inconclusive evidence; variations in the quality of care at hospitals should be considered in studies using national databases.

While OPP, delivery, and utilization continue to represent challenges to health care access in many LMICs, the inclusion of surgery in many UHC policies sets an important precedent in addressing a growing global prevalence of surgically treatable conditions. Barriers to access, including inequalities in financial protection in the form of high OPP, remain a fundamental challenge to providing surgical care in LMICs.

One-third of the global burden of disease is attributed to surgical conditions yet, 5 billion people globally, lack access to surgery. The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, Obstetrics, and Anesthesia (LCOGS) published guidelines for improving access by reducing catastrophic health expenditures (CHEs) by 2030. This is especially important in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) where 90% of the extreme poor reside. In this paper, we provide a narrative review of four studies on CHEs for surgical care in SSA published since 2015. We discuss healthcare financing in the countries and summarize the authors’ key findings of out-of-pocket payments (OOP) and CHEs. Briefly, the studies enrolled 130 to 300 patients and collected direct OOPs via chart review of health costs or patient interviews. Indirect costs were calculated from lost wages and transportation costs. CHEs were defined as health costs exceeding 10% of the GDP per capita or the household income. Despite healthcare being reported as free in all studies, 60%-90% of surgical patients had CHEs with all costs considered. OOPs persists for medicines and anesthesia that should be covered under any health insurance scheme. In some cases, indirect costs associated with transportation and wages were major drivers of CHEs for surgery. Without addressing these gaps in coverage, more people will risk impoverishment in seeking surgical care in SSA.

IntroductionAlthough diuretics are mainly used for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), inadequate responses and complications have led to the use of extracorporeal ultrafiltration (UF) as an alternative strategy for reducing volume overloads in patients with ADHF.ObjectiveThe aim of our study is to perform meta-analysis of the results obtained from studies on extracorporeal venous ultrafiltration and compare them with those of standard diuretic treatment for overload volume reduction in acute decompensated heart failure.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were systematically searched using a pre‑specified criterion. Pooled estimates of outcomes after 48 h (weight change, serum creatinine level, and all-cause mortality) were computed using random effect models. Pooled weighted mean differences were calculated for weight loss and change in creatinine level, whereas a pooled risk ratio was used for the analysis of binary all-cause mortality outcome.ResultsA total of nine studies, involving 613 patients, met the eligibility criteria. The mean weight loss in patients who underwent UF therapy was 1.78 kg [95% Confidence Interval (CI): −2.65 to −0.91 kg; p < 0.001) more than those who received standard diuretic therapy. The post-intervention creatinine level, however, was not significantly different (mean change = −0.25 mg/dL; 95% CI: −0.56 to 0.06 mg/dL; p = 0.112). The risk of all-cause mortality persisted in patients treated with UF compared with patients treated with standard diuretics (Pooled RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.64–1.56; p = 0.993).ConclusionCompared with standard diuretic therapy, UF treatment for overload volume reduction in individuals suffering from ADHF, resulted in significant reduction of body weight within 48 h. However, no significant decrease of serum creatinine level or reduction of all-cause mortality was observed.

No abstract

No abstract