Celsus, Academy for Sustainable Healthcare, IQ Healthcare, Radboud University and Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 114 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
NYU Wagner School of Public Service, New York University, 295 Lafayette street, New York, NY, 10012, USA.
BMC Public Health. 2018 Mar 1;18(1):300. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5198-y.
Publicly funded healthcare forms an intricate part of government spending in most Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, because of its reliance on entitlements and dedicated revenue streams. The impact of budgetary rules and procedures on publicly funded health care might thus be different from other spending categories. In this study we focus on the potential of fiscal rules to contain these costs and their design features.
We assess the relationship between fiscal rules and the level of public health care expenditure of 32 (OECD) countries between 1985 and 2014. Our dataset consists of health care expenditure data of the OECD and data on fiscal rules of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for that same period. Through a multivariate regression analysis, we estimate the association between fiscal rules and its subcategories and inflation adjusted public health care expenditure. We control for population, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), debt and whether countries received an IMF bailout for the specific period. In all our regressions we include country and year fixed effects.
The presence of a fiscal rule on average is associated with a 3 % reduction of public health care expenditure. Supranational balanced budget rules are associated with some 8 % lower expenditure. Health service provision-oriented countries with more passive purchasing structures seem less capable of containing costs through fiscal rules. Fiscal rules demonstrate lagged effectiveness; the potential for expenditure reduction increases after one and two years of fiscal rule implementation. Finally, we find evidence that fiscal frameworks that incorporate multi-year expenditure ceilings show additional potential for cost control.
Our study shows that there seems a clear relationship between the potential of fiscal rules and budgeting health expenses. Using fiscal rules to contain the level of health care expenditure can thus be a necessary precondition for successful strategies for cost control.
在大多数经济合作与发展组织(OECD)国家,公共资助的医疗保健是政府支出的一个复杂组成部分,因为它依赖于应享权利和专用收入来源。因此,预算规则和程序对公共资助的医疗保健的影响可能与其他支出类别不同。在这项研究中,我们专注于财政规则控制这些成本的潜力及其设计特点。
我们评估了 1985 年至 2014 年间 32 个(经合组织)国家的财政规则与公共医疗保健支出水平之间的关系。我们的数据集包括经合组织的医疗保健支出数据和国际货币基金组织(IMF)同期的财政规则数据。通过多元回归分析,我们估计了财政规则及其子类别与经通胀调整的公共医疗保健支出之间的关联。我们控制了人口、国内生产总值(GDP)、债务以及各国在特定时期是否获得国际货币基金组织救助等因素。在所有回归中,我们都包含了国家和年份的固定效应。
平均而言,存在财政规则与公共医疗保健支出减少 3%相关。超国家平衡预算规则与支出减少约 8%相关。提供医疗服务为主的国家,其购买结构较为被动,似乎通过财政规则来控制成本的能力较弱。财政规则具有滞后效应;在实施财政规则一年和两年后,减少支出的潜力增加。最后,我们有证据表明,纳入多年度支出上限的财政框架在控制成本方面具有额外的潜力。
我们的研究表明,财政规则的潜力与预算医疗费用之间似乎存在明确的关系。因此,利用财政规则来控制医疗保健支出水平可以成为成功控制成本战略的必要前提。