Health Expenditure Growth under Single-Payer Systems: Comparing South Korea and Taiwan.

Achieving universal health coverage has been an important goal for many countries worldwide. However, the rapid growth of health expenditures has challenged all nations, both those with and without such universal coverage. Single-payer systems are considered more efficient for administrative affairs and may be more effective for containing costs than multipayer systems. However, South Korea, which has a typical single-payer scheme, has almost the highest growth rate in health expenditures among industrialized countries. The aim of the present study is to explicate this situation by comparing South Korea with Taiwan. This study analyzed statistical reports published by government departments in South Korea and Taiwan from 2001 to 2015, including population and economic statistics, health statistics, health expenditures, and social health insurance reports. Between 2001 and 2015, the per capita national health expenditure (NHE) in South Korea grew 292%, whereas the corresponding growth of per capita NHE in Taiwan was only 83%. We find that the national health insurance (NHI) global budget cap in Taiwan may have restricted the growth of health expenditures. Less comprehensive benefit coverage for essential diagnosis/treatment services under the South Korean NHI program may have contributed to the growth of out-of-pocket payments. The expansion of insurance coverage for vulnerable individuals may also contribute to higher growth in NHE in South Korea. Explicit regulation of health care resource distribution may also lead to more limited provisioning and utilization of health services in Taiwan. Under analogous single-payer systems, South Korea had a much higher growth in health spending than Taiwan. The annual budget cap for total reimbursement, more comprehensive coverage for essential diagnosis and treatment services, and the regulation of health care resource distribution are important factors associated with the growth of health expenditures.

Cheng SH ，Jin HH ，Yang BM ，Blank RH ... -  《-》

Managing health expenditure inflation under a single-payer system: Taiwan's National Health Insurance.

As nations strive to achieve and sustain universal health coverage (UHC), they seek answers as to what health system structures are more effective in managing health expenditure inflation. A fundamental macro-level choice a nation has to make is whether to adopt a single- or a multiple-payer health system. Using Taiwan's National Health Insurance (NHI) as a case, this paper examines how a single-payer system manages its health expenditure growth and draws lessons for other countries whose socioeconomic development is similar to Taiwan's. Our analyses show that as a single payer, Taiwan's NHI is able to exercise its monopsony power to manage its health expenditure growth. This is achieved primarily through the adoption of a system-wide global budget. The global budget sets a hard aggregate budget cap to limit NHI's total spending to its expected revenue, with the annual budget growth rate established by a process of negotiation among key stakeholders. The global budget system is complemented by comprehensive and continuous monitoring and review of encounter records of all providers and patients, enabled by the NHI's advanced information technology. However, by paying its providers using a point-based fee schedule, Taiwan's NHI suffers from inefficient service provision. In particular, providers have incentives to increase use of services and drugs with positive profit margins. Furthermore, Taiwan demonstrates that its control of NHI expenditure growth might be leading it to inadequately meet the changing needs of the population, resulting in the rapid growth of private insurance to cover services excluded or not fully covered by the NHI. If this trend persists and results in a two-tier system, Taiwan's NHI may risk compromising the equity it has achieved in the past two decades.

Yip WC ，Lee YC ，Tsai SL ，Chen B ... -  《-》

Reflections on the 20th anniversary of Taiwan's single-payer National Health Insurance System.

On its twentieth anniversary, Taiwan's National Health Insurance (NHI) stands out as a high-performing single-payer national health insurance system that provides universal health coverage to Taiwan's 23.4 million residents based on egalitarian ethical principles. The system has encountered myriad challenges over the years, including serious financial deficits. Taiwan's government managed those crises through successive policy adjustments and reforms. Taiwan's NHI continues to enjoy high public satisfaction and delivers affordable modern health care to all Taiwanese without the waiting times in single-payer systems such as those in England and Canada. It faces challenges, including balancing the system's budget, improving the quality of health care, and achieving greater cost-effectiveness. However, Taiwan's experience with the NHI shows that a single-payer approach can work and control health care costs effectively. There are lessons for the United States in how to expand coverage rapidly, manage incremental adjustments to the health system, and achieve freedom of choice.

Cheng TM 《-》

What can the Canadians and Americans learn from each other's health care systems?

Numerous papers have been written comparing the Canadian and US healthcare systems, and a number of health policy experts have recommended that the Americans implement their single-payer system to save 12-20% of its healthcare expenditures. This paper is different in that it assumes that neither country will undertake a significant philosophic or structural change in their healthcare system, but there are lessons to be learned that are inherent in one that could be a major breakthrough for the other. Following the model in Canada and in Western Europe, the USA could implement universal health insurance so that the 32.0 million (2015) Americans still uninsured would have at least minimal coverage when incurring medical expenditures. Also, the USA could use smart cards to evaluate eligibility and to process health insurance claims; these changes resulting in an estimated 15% reduction in US health expenditures without adversely effecting access or quality of care. Such a strategy would result in the eventual loss of 2.5 million white-collar jobs at hospitals, physician offices and insurance companies, a long-term economic gain. Only a few would agree with the statement that Canada already functions with a multi-payer reimbursement system as evidenced by (1) a federal-provincial, tax-supported plan, administered by each of the provinces, providing universal coverage for hospital and physician services and (2) roughly 60% of its residents receiving employer-paid health insurance benefits, underwritten primarily by investor-owned plans, that are less than effective to reimburse for pharmaceuticals, dental and other healthcare services. What could be learned from the USA and particularly from Western European countries is possibly implementing an approach, whereby at least upper-income Canadians could opt out of their federal-provincial plan and purchase private insurance coverage - being eligible for far more comprehensive "private" benefits for hospital, physician, pharmaceutical, dental and other healthcare services. Aside from generating billions of additional needed revenues from the private sector, it could (1) help eliminate long waits for non-emergent physicians' care by appointing newly minted specialists to their medical staffs; (2) offer prompt admissions for elective cases to "private" wings of hospitals; (3) increase available funding for what is currently an undercapitalized system; (4) enhance the system's sluggish operations; and (5) encourage more competition among various providers. Although such a two-tier approach, such as available in the USA and elsewhere, is politically dead on arrival in Canada today, private insurance being already legal and commonly available there. Interestingly, this recommended solution is utilized in most western European countries where there is a higher percentage than in Canada of public (versus private) funding of their total health expenditures. Because of various vested interests, attempts to implement any of the aforementioned proposals will undoubtedly result in considerable political rancor. There is greater likelihood, however, that the Canadians because their need to be more effective and efficient in their delivery of care, and their overall long-term fiscal outlook will agree to the further privatization of their healthcare system before the Americans will mandate universal access, use the smart card to process insurance eligibility and claims or will impose price controls on high-tech services and on pharmaceuticals. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Weil TP 《-》

The impact of the expanded health insurance coverage policy on healthcare spending: evidence from Korea.

South Korea's National Health Insurance (NHI) system pursues universal health coverage, but it has not been able to alleviate patients' financial burden owing to limited coverage and a high proportion of out-of-pocket expenses. In 2017, the government announced a plan to strengthen universality by providing coverage for all unincluded services, expanding coverage, and alleviating household financial burden. We aimed to evaluate the effect of "Moon Care" with a focus on changes in health expenditures following policy implementation, and to provide empirical evidence for future policies to strengthen the NHI system's universality. Using data from the 2016 and 2018 Korea Health Panel (KHP), we established a treatment group affected by the policy and an unaffected control group; we ensured homogeneity between the groups using propensity score matching (PSM). Subsequently, we examined changes in NHI payments, non-payments, and out-of-pocket payments (OOP); we performed difference-in-differences (DID) analysis to evaluate the policy's effect. Following policy implementation, the control group had a higher increase than the treatment group in all categories of health expenditures, including NHI payments, non-payments, and OOP. We noted significant decreases in all three categories of health expenditures when comparing the differences before and after policy implementation, as well as between the treatment and control groups. However, we witnessed a significant decrease in the interaction term, which confirms the policy's effect, but only for non-payments. We observed the policy's intervention effect over time as a decrease in non-payments, on the effectivity of remunerating covered medical services. However, the policy did not work for NHI payments and OOP, suggesting that it failed to control the creation of new non-covered services as noncovered services were converted into covered ones. Thus, it is crucial to discuss the financial spending of health insurance regarding the inclusion of non-covered services in the NHI benefits package.

Ji S ，Lee M ，Choi M ，Park S ... -  《International Journal for Equity in Health》