|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Lancet
Dear members of the Inter-Agency Expert Group on the Sustainable Development Goals (IAEG-SDGs),
We
write as members of the health, academic, and, research community to
urge you to agree on a refinement of SDG Indicator 3.8.2, which is on
financial risk protection for universal health coverage (UHC), when you
meet this week at the IAEG-SDGs meeting in Geneva.
UHC
has the potential to transform the lives of millions of people by
bringing life-saving health care to those who need it most. Worldwide,
every year 1 billion people are denied medical care because they cannot
afford to pay, while 100 million are pushed into poverty by health-care
costs.1
The need for UHC couldn't be more urgent, and the inclusion of a target
to achieve UHC in the SDGs is a triumph of global decision making.
UHC
means that everyone can access the quality health services they need
without being pushed, or pushed further, into poverty. There are two
clear indicators required to measure UHC: one for coverage (indicator
3.8.1), and one that can measure effective financial risk protection
(indicator 3.8.2). We are pleased to see both aspects of UHC reflected
in the framework and we congratulate you on agreeing on a robust
indicator for health coverage (3.8.1).
We are, however,
very concerned that indicator 3.8.2 for financial risk protection as it
stands—coverage by health insurance or a public health system per 1000
population—will fail to measure the impoverishing effect of health
spending meaningfully, and could undermine real progress towards UHC.
Having a public health system or an insurance mechanism is, in itself,
not a measure or guarantee of financial risk protection. Moreover, this
indicator will not produce data that can be disaggregated by income or
gender.
We endorse the WHO and World Bank supported
refinement to indicator 3.8.2: the proportion of the population with
large household expenditures on health, as a total share of household
expenditure or consumption. Data on household expenditure on health can
be collected from existing household surveys, and this indicator allows
for disaggregation, including by measures such as income and gender.
As
members of the academic and research community, we want to see an
indicator of financial risk protection that is scientifically robust and
neutral with regard to alternative health financing mechanisms. A
methodologically sound measure of the financial burden of health-care
costs on household budgets will help academics, researchers, and health
policy makers to better understand the effectiveness of different policy
instruments, and can best support evidence-based policy making.
We
are grateful for the opportunity to convey this message to you, and we
hope that, on consideration, you will agree on an indicator for
financial risk protection that supports our global ambition for quality,
affordable, and equitable health-care coverage that leaves no-one
behind.
We declare no competing interests.
Supplementary Material (international signatories)
Title | Description | Type | Size |
---|---|---|---|
Supplementary appendix | .27 MB |
Reference
- Xu, K, Evans, D, Carrin, G, Aguilar-Rivera, AM, Musgrove, P, and Evans, T. Protecting households from catastrophic health spending. Health Affairs. 2007; 26: 972–983
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.