Cargando…
Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage
Background: As universal health coverage becomes the norm in many countries, it is important to determine public priorities regarding benefits to include in health insurance coverage. We report results of participation in a decision exercise among residents of Switzerland, a high-income country with...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Kerman University of Medical Sciences
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077280/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30078295 http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2018.15 |
_version_ | 1783344878090977280 |
---|---|
author | Hurst, Samia A. Schindler, Mélinée Goold, Susan D. Danis, Marion |
author_facet | Hurst, Samia A. Schindler, Mélinée Goold, Susan D. Danis, Marion |
author_sort | Hurst, Samia A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: As universal health coverage becomes the norm in many countries, it is important to determine public priorities regarding benefits to include in health insurance coverage. We report results of participation in a decision exercise among residents of Switzerland, a high-income country with a long history of universal health insurance and deliberative democracy. Methods: We adapted the Choosing Healthplans All Together (CHAT) tool, an exercise developed to transform complex healthcare allocation decisions into easily understandable choices, for use in Switzerland. We conducted CHAT exercises in twelve Swiss cities with recruitment from a range of socio-economic backgrounds, taking into account differences in language and culture. Results: Compared to existing coverage, a majority of 175 participants accepted greater general practice gatekeeping (94%), exclusion of invasive life-sustaining measures in dying patients (80%), longer waiting times for non-urgent episodic care (78%), greater adherence to cost-effectiveness guidelines in chronic care (66%), and lower premium subsidies (51%). Most initially chose greater coverage for dental care (59%), quality of life (57%), and long-term care (90%). During group deliberations, participants increased coverage for out-of-pocket costs (58%) and mental health to current levels (41%) and beyond current levels for rehabilitation (50%), and decreased coverage for quality of life to current levels (74%). Following group deliberation, they tended to change their views back to below current coverage for help with out-of-pocket costs, and back to current levels for rehabilitation. Most participants accepted the plan as appropriate and fair. A significant number would have added nothing. Conclusion: Swiss participants who have engaged in a priority setting exercise accept complex resource allocation trade-offs in healthcare coverage. Moreover, in the context of a well-funded healthcare system with universal coverage centered on individual choice, at least some of our participants believed a fully sufficient threshold of health insurance coverage was achieved. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6077280 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Kerman University of Medical Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60772802018-08-09 Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage Hurst, Samia A. Schindler, Mélinée Goold, Susan D. Danis, Marion Int J Health Policy Manag Original Article Background: As universal health coverage becomes the norm in many countries, it is important to determine public priorities regarding benefits to include in health insurance coverage. We report results of participation in a decision exercise among residents of Switzerland, a high-income country with a long history of universal health insurance and deliberative democracy. Methods: We adapted the Choosing Healthplans All Together (CHAT) tool, an exercise developed to transform complex healthcare allocation decisions into easily understandable choices, for use in Switzerland. We conducted CHAT exercises in twelve Swiss cities with recruitment from a range of socio-economic backgrounds, taking into account differences in language and culture. Results: Compared to existing coverage, a majority of 175 participants accepted greater general practice gatekeeping (94%), exclusion of invasive life-sustaining measures in dying patients (80%), longer waiting times for non-urgent episodic care (78%), greater adherence to cost-effectiveness guidelines in chronic care (66%), and lower premium subsidies (51%). Most initially chose greater coverage for dental care (59%), quality of life (57%), and long-term care (90%). During group deliberations, participants increased coverage for out-of-pocket costs (58%) and mental health to current levels (41%) and beyond current levels for rehabilitation (50%), and decreased coverage for quality of life to current levels (74%). Following group deliberation, they tended to change their views back to below current coverage for help with out-of-pocket costs, and back to current levels for rehabilitation. Most participants accepted the plan as appropriate and fair. A significant number would have added nothing. Conclusion: Swiss participants who have engaged in a priority setting exercise accept complex resource allocation trade-offs in healthcare coverage. Moreover, in the context of a well-funded healthcare system with universal coverage centered on individual choice, at least some of our participants believed a fully sufficient threshold of health insurance coverage was achieved. Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2018-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6077280/ /pubmed/30078295 http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2018.15 Text en © 2018 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences 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 cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Hurst, Samia A. Schindler, Mélinée Goold, Susan D. Danis, Marion Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
title | Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
title_full | Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
title_fullStr | Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
title_full_unstemmed | Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
title_short | Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
title_sort | swiss-chat: citizens discuss priorities for swiss health insurance coverage |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077280/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30078295 http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2018.15 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hurstsamiaa swisschatcitizensdiscussprioritiesforswisshealthinsurancecoverage AT schindlermelinee swisschatcitizensdiscussprioritiesforswisshealthinsurancecoverage AT gooldsusand swisschatcitizensdiscussprioritiesforswisshealthinsurancecoverage AT danismarion swisschatcitizensdiscussprioritiesforswisshealthinsurancecoverage |