ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Out-of-Pocket Expenditure (OOPE) Among COVID-19 Patients by Insurance Status in a Quaternary Hospital in Karnataka, India.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) comprises 62% of national health expenditure in India. This heavy reliance on direct payments has engendered economic vulnerability and catastrophic financial pressures (typically defined as out-of-pocket spending exceeding a certain threshold of household income, leading to financial hardship) on households in a country where public health spending remains below targeted levels. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic intensified these financial hardships further, as both total healthcare spending and OOPE experienced significant escalations due to the increased need for emergency care, vaccination efforts, and expanded health infrastructure. A retrospective, single-center study was conducted using data from COVID-19 patients admitted between June 2020 and June 2022. Patient data were collected from the Medical Records, IT, and Finance departments. A validated proforma was used for data extraction. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and the Shapiro-Wilk test was applied to assess normality of billing and OOPE data. Patients were stratified into three groups based on their insurance status, allowing for comparative analysis of OOPE percentages and absolute expenditures. The 2715 COVID-19 patients were categorized into three groups according to their health financing: those covered under AB-PMJAY (42.76%), private health insurance (22.16%), and the uninsured (35%). While the median billing amounts were comparable across these groups (ranging between INR 85,000 and INR 90,000), a substantial disparity was observed in terms of financial burden. All patients covered under AB-PMJAY incurred no OOPE, whereas privately insured patients had a median OOPE that constituted approximately 21% of their total billing amounts, with significant variability among different insurers. The uninsured group represented 35% of the cases and experienced the highest median OOPE, indicating substantial financial risk. The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed critical gaps in India's health financing framework. This study emphasizes the strong financial protection provided by AB-PMJAY, while also exposing the limitations of private health insurance in shielding patients from substantial healthcare costs. As the country progresses toward universal health coverage, there is a pressing need to expand public health insurance schemes that are inclusive, equitable, and effectively implemented. Additionally, strengthening regulation and accountability in the private insurance sector is essential. The study findings reinforce that AB-PMJAY has been highly successful in reducing OOPE and enhancing financial risk protection. Although private insurance reduced OOPE, patients still faced considerable expenses. The stark difference in OOPE of 100% for uninsured patients, 21.16% for privately insured, and 0% for AB-PMJAY beneficiaries underscores the importance of further expanding AB-PMJAY to reach more vulnerable populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.