Obermann Konrad, Jowett Matthew, Kwon Soonman
a Mannheim Institute for Public Health (MIPH) , Heidelberg University , Mannheim , Germany.
b Department of Health Systems Governance & Financing , World Health Organization , Geneva , Switzerland.
Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1):1483638. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2018.1483638.
Achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) has by now become a key health policy goal in many countries and some form of National Health Insurance (NHI) is often used for this. The Philippines has had more than 50 years' experience with social health insurance and in 1995 established PhilHealth, the country's national health insurer.
Analyzing the role of the Philippine NHI scheme in moving towards UHC, identifying potential avenues for improvement as well as indicating challenges and areas for further development.
This paper is based on a mixed methods approach including extensive literature search, data from PhilHealth and other sources, and key informant interviews with staff at PhilHealth, health care providers, and policy experts at national and international level.
Major achievements were the expansion of population coverage using an earmarked revenue source ('Sin Tax'), the introduction of the no-balance-billing to prevent co-payments, and the Health Facilities Enhancement Program to improve quality. The share of PhilHealth in total health expenditures is still only 14%, managing quality and cost of providers remains insufficient, the benefit coverage does not reflect the country's burden of disease, and financial protection for PhilHealth members is low. The UHC bill would provide a massive jump forward as all Filipinos would then be automatically enrolled in and thus entitled to the benefits of PhilHealth.
For expanding a contribution-based NHI beyond formal employment there needs to be a large increase in budget transfers to cover for citizens unable to contribute. The Philippine UHC bill shifts from the idea of contribution leading to entitlement to the idea of citizenship leading to entitlement and can thus be seen as a paradigmatic change in thinking about NHI. There are three areas that we believe are of key importance in developing further NHI: (i) governance, (ii) financial impact, and (iii) strategic purchasing.
如今,实现全民健康覆盖(UHC)已成为许多国家关键的卫生政策目标,某种形式的国家健康保险(NHI)常被用于此。菲律宾在社会健康保险方面已有50多年经验,并于1995年设立了该国的国家健康保险公司——菲律宾健康保险公司(PhilHealth)。
分析菲律宾国家健康保险计划在迈向全民健康覆盖过程中的作用,确定潜在的改进途径,并指出挑战和进一步发展的领域。
本文基于混合研究方法,包括广泛的文献检索、来自菲律宾健康保险公司及其他来源的数据,以及对菲律宾健康保险公司工作人员、医疗服务提供者以及国家和国际层面政策专家的关键信息访谈。
主要成就包括利用专项收入来源(“烟草税”)扩大人口覆盖范围、引入无差额计费以防止自付费用,以及实施卫生设施强化计划以提高质量。菲律宾健康保险公司在卫生总支出中的占比仍仅为14%,对医疗服务提供者质量和成本的管理仍显不足,福利覆盖范围未反映该国的疾病负担,且菲律宾健康保险公司成员的财务保护水平较低。全民健康覆盖法案将带来巨大飞跃,因为届时所有菲律宾人都将自动加入并有权享受菲律宾健康保险公司的福利。
为了将基于缴费的国家健康保险扩展到正规就业之外的人群,需要大幅增加预算转移支付,以覆盖无力缴费的公民。菲律宾全民健康覆盖法案从缴费产生权益的理念转变为公民身份产生权益的理念,因此可被视为国家健康保险思维范式的转变。我们认为,在进一步发展国家健康保险方面有三个关键领域:(i)治理,(ii)财务影响,以及(iii)战略采购。