Cargando…

The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), while traditionally considered a “rich world”-problem, have been spreading fast in low and middle income countries and by now account for a large share of mortality and ill-health in these countries, too. In addition to the disease burden, NCDs may also...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goryakin, Yevgeniy, Suhrcke, Marc
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4228103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25376485
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-014-0107-1
_version_ 1782343916147703808
author Goryakin, Yevgeniy
Suhrcke, Marc
author_facet Goryakin, Yevgeniy
Suhrcke, Marc
author_sort Goryakin, Yevgeniy
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), while traditionally considered a “rich world”-problem, have been spreading fast in low and middle income countries and by now account for a large share of mortality and ill-health in these countries, too. In addition to the disease burden, NCDs may also impose a substantial economic cost. One way in which NCDs might impact people’s economic well-being may be via the out-of-pocket expenditures required to cover treatment and other costs associated with suffering from an NCD. METHODS: In this commentary, we identify and discuss the methodological challenges related to cross-country comparison of-out-of-pocket and catastrophic out-of-pocket health care expenditures, attributable to NCDs, focussing on low and middle income countries. RESULTS: There is significant evidence of substantial cost burden placed by NCDs on patients living in low and middle income countries, with most of it being heavily concentrated among low socioeconomic status groups. However, a large variation in definition of COOPE between studies prevents cross-country comparison. In addition, as most studies tend to be observational, causal inferences are often not possible. This is further complicated by the cross-sectional nature of studies, small sample sizes, and/or limited duration of follow-up of patients. Most evidence for certain conditions (e.g., cancer) tends to be collected in high-income countries only. CONCLUSIONS: The definitions for COOPEs should be standardized as much as possible, to enable comparison of COOPE prevalence between countries. Prospective study design using larger samples representative of broader sections of local population, collecting better data on both direct and indirect treatment costs is also needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-014-0107-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4228103
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42281032014-11-12 The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary Goryakin, Yevgeniy Suhrcke, Marc Int J Equity Health Research BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), while traditionally considered a “rich world”-problem, have been spreading fast in low and middle income countries and by now account for a large share of mortality and ill-health in these countries, too. In addition to the disease burden, NCDs may also impose a substantial economic cost. One way in which NCDs might impact people’s economic well-being may be via the out-of-pocket expenditures required to cover treatment and other costs associated with suffering from an NCD. METHODS: In this commentary, we identify and discuss the methodological challenges related to cross-country comparison of-out-of-pocket and catastrophic out-of-pocket health care expenditures, attributable to NCDs, focussing on low and middle income countries. RESULTS: There is significant evidence of substantial cost burden placed by NCDs on patients living in low and middle income countries, with most of it being heavily concentrated among low socioeconomic status groups. However, a large variation in definition of COOPE between studies prevents cross-country comparison. In addition, as most studies tend to be observational, causal inferences are often not possible. This is further complicated by the cross-sectional nature of studies, small sample sizes, and/or limited duration of follow-up of patients. Most evidence for certain conditions (e.g., cancer) tends to be collected in high-income countries only. CONCLUSIONS: The definitions for COOPEs should be standardized as much as possible, to enable comparison of COOPE prevalence between countries. Prospective study design using larger samples representative of broader sections of local population, collecting better data on both direct and indirect treatment costs is also needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12939-014-0107-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4228103/ /pubmed/25376485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-014-0107-1 Text en © Goryakin and Suhrcke; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Goryakin, Yevgeniy
Suhrcke, Marc
The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
title The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
title_full The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
title_fullStr The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
title_full_unstemmed The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
title_short The prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
title_sort prevalence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditures attributable to non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a methodological commentary
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4228103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25376485
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-014-0107-1
work_keys_str_mv AT goryakinyevgeniy theprevalenceanddeterminantsofcatastrophichealthexpendituresattributabletononcommunicablediseasesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesamethodologicalcommentary
AT suhrckemarc theprevalenceanddeterminantsofcatastrophichealthexpendituresattributabletononcommunicablediseasesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesamethodologicalcommentary
AT goryakinyevgeniy prevalenceanddeterminantsofcatastrophichealthexpendituresattributabletononcommunicablediseasesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesamethodologicalcommentary
AT suhrckemarc prevalenceanddeterminantsofcatastrophichealthexpendituresattributabletononcommunicablediseasesinlowandmiddleincomecountriesamethodologicalcommentary