Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27769256›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

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

Paibul Suriyawongpaisal, Wichai Aekplakorn, Samrit Srithamrongsawat, Chaisit Srithongchai, Orawan Prasitsiriphon, Rassamee Tansirisithikul

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Paibul SuriyawongpaisalDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Wichai AekplakornDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Samrit SrithamrongsawatDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chaisit SrithongchaiDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Orawan PrasitsiriphonDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Rassamee TansirisithikulDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. artrassamee@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough 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.

methodsUsing 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.

resultsThe 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.

conclusionsWe 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.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCost SharingDelivery of Health CareEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleFinancing, GovernmentHealth ExpendituresHealth Services AccessibilityHospitals, PrivateHumansMaleMiddle AgedPublic HealthThailandCopaymentEmergency medical servicesUniversal Health Coverage Schemes

Identifiers

PMID27769256
PMCPMC5073698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.