OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
The International journal of health planning and management
Sep 19, 2024;

Voluntary private health insurance and cancer screening utilisation in Europe.

A Isabel Tavares
Author Information
  1. A Isabel Tavares: CEISUC, Centre for Health Studies and Research of the University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. ORCID
PMID: 39297190 DOI: 10.1002/hpm.3852

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a leading cause of death in Europe and prevention measures, like screening, are therefore becoming increasingly important. Although European countries provide universal health coverage, including cancer screenings, many people also have private health insurance.
AIM: The aim of this study is to analyse the relationship between Voluntary private health insurance (VPHI) and cancer screening, specifically breast and colorectal cancer screening.
METHOD: Using data from SHARE, the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe, different logistic and multilevel regressions were estimated.
RESULTS: The major finding shows a positive correlation between people being screened for cancer and having VPHI.
CONCLUSIONS: Three conclusions can be drawn: advantageous selection may exist in private health insurance; spillover effects may exist from the public sector into the private sector, which in turn may result in a lower insurance premium; and there may be a perpetuation of inequalities in health service utilisation. Several policy implications can be drawn from this result, but the most relevant concerns narrowing the inequities that could potentially arise between those who have private health insurance and those who do not.

Keywords

SHARE survey cancer screening voluntary private health insurance

References

  1. Cancer Europe. About cancer screening. 2023. https://www.cancer.eu/cancer���screening���in���europe/
  2. Guthmuller S, Carrier V, W��bker A. Effects of organized screening programs on breast cancer screening, incidence, and mortality in Europe. J Health Econ. 2023;92:102803.
  3. Ebell MH, Thai TN, Royalty KJ. Cancer screening recommendations: an international comparison of high income countries. Publ Health Rev. 2018;39(1):7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40985���018���0080���0
  4. European Commission. European Health Union: Commission Welcomes Adoption of New EU Cancer Screening Recommendations. Press release; 2022. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_5562
  5. Bozhar H, McKee M, Spadea T, et al. Socio���economic inequality of utilization of cancer testing in Europe: a cross���sectional study. Prev Med Rep. 2022;8(26):101733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.101733
  6. Mossialos E, Thomson S. Voluntary health insurance in the European union: a critical assessment. Int J Health Serv. 2002;32(1):19���88. https://doi.org/10.2190/k6bp���3h1r���l41m���hvge
  7. Abaluck J, Caceres Bravo M, Hull P, Starc A. Mortality Effects and Choice across Private Health Insurance Plans. NBER Working Paper Series; 2020. Working Paper 27578.
  8. Tapay N, Colombo F. Private Health Insurance in the Netherlands. A Case Study. OECD; 2004. OECD Health Working Papers No. 18. DELSA/ELSA/WD/HEA(2004)9. www.oecd.org/els/health/workingpapers
  9. Palladino R. Voluntary private health insurance and management of frailty in European Health Systems: a longitudinal analysis. Eur J Publ Health. 2023;33(suppl ment_2). https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckad160.105
  10. Alexandersen N, Anell A, Kaarboe O, Lehto JS, Tynkkynen LK, Vrangbaek K. The development of voluntary private health insurance in the Nordic countries. Nordic J Health Econ. 2016;4(1):68���83. https://doi.org/10.5617/njhe.2718
  11. Enea M, Enea L, Maniscalco A, et al. Turnover Intention determinants of EU hospital doctors and nurses: results from the METEOR survey. Eur J Publ Health. 2023;33(suppl ment_2):ckad160���745. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckad160.745
  12. Kiil A. What characterises the privately insured in universal health care systems? A review of the empirical evidence. Health Pol. 2012;106(1):60���75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.02.019
  13. Arrow KJ. Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. Am Econ Rev. 1963;53(5):941���973.
  14. Rothschild MSJ. Equilibrium in competitive insurance markets. Q J Econ. 1976;90(4):629���649. https://doi.org/10.2307/1885326
  15. Meza D, Webb DC. Advantageous selection in insurance markets. Rand J Econ. 2001;32(2):249���262.
  16. Briand S, Lesueur J. Does health care program participation favor advantageous selection? Some econometric results from insurance company data. In: 59��me congr��s de la Soci��t�� Canadienne de Sciences Economiques; 2019. Qu��bec, Canada ���halshs���02194880���. https://shs.hal.science/halshs���02194880
  17. Ehrlich I, Becker G. Market insurance, self���insurance, and self���protection. J Polit Econ. 1972;80(4):623���648. https://doi.org/10.1086/259916
  18. Pauly MV. The economics of moral hazard: comment. Am Econ Rev. 1968;58(3):531���537.
  19. Shavell S. On moral hazard and insurance. Q J Econ. 1979;4:541���602. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884469
  20. Zweifel P, Manning WG. Moral hazard and consumer incentives in health care. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP, eds. Handbook of Health Economics. Vol 1A. North Holland; 2000. ch. 8.
  21. Kenkel DS. Prevention. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP, eds. Handbook of Health Economics. Vol 1B. North Holland; 2000. ch. 31.
  22. Courbage C, de Coulon A. Prevention and private health insurance in the U.K. Geneva Pap Risk Insur ��� Issues Pract. 2004;29(4):719���727. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468���0440.2004.00313.x
  23. Einav L, Finkelstein AN. Moral hazard in health insurance: what we know and how we know it. J Eur Econ Assoc. 2018;16(4):957���982. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvy017
  24. Cherkin DC, Grothaus L, Wagner EH. The effect of office visit copayments on preventive care services in an HMO. Inquiry. 1990;27(1):24���38.
  25. Keeler EB, Rolph JE. The demand for episodes of treatment in the health insurance experiment. J Health Econ. 1988;7(4):337���367. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167���6296(88)90020���3
  26. Marlow NM, Pavluck AL, Bian J, et al. The Relationship between Insurance Coverage and Cancer Care: A Literature Synthesis. RTI International; 2009. RTI Press publication No. RR���0005���0905. http://www.rti.org/rtipress
  27. Pollack LA, Blackman DK, Wilson KM, et al. Colorectal cancer test use among Hispanic and non���Hispanic US populations. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;3(2):A50.
  28. Echeverria SE, Carrasquillo O. The roles of citizenship status, acculturation, and health insurance in breast and cervical cancer screening among immigrant women. Med Care. 2006;44(8):788���792. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000215863.24214.41
  29. Borras JM, Guillen M, S��nchez V, Junc�� S, Vicente R. Educational level, voluntary private health insurance and opportunistic cancer screening among women in Catalonia (Spain). Eur J Cancer Prev: Official Journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation. 1999;8(5):427���434. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008469���199910000���00008
  30. Share 2023. https://share���eric.eu/data/data���documentation/waves���overview/wave���8
  31. B��rsch���Supan A. Survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe (SHARE) wave 8. Release version: 8.0.0. SHARE���ERIC. Data set. 2022. https://doi.org/10.6103/SHARE.w8.800
  32. Schuller K, Lasson S, Sand G, et al. SHARE Compliance Profiles ��� Wave 8. Munich: MEA. Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy; 2021.
  33. Bergmann M, Kneip T, De Luca G, Scherpenzeel A. Survey participation in the eighth wave of the survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe (SHARE). SHARE Working Papers. Working Paper Series 81���2022; 2022. https://doi.org/10.17617/2.3390284
  34. Scherpenzeel A, Axt K, Bergmann M, et al. Collecting survey data among the 50+ population during the COVID���19 outbreak: the survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe (SHARE). Survey Res Methods. 2020;14(2):217���221.
  35. Bergmann M, B��rsch���Supan A. SHARE Wave 8 Methodology: Collecting Cross���National Survey Data in Times of COVID���19. MEA, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy; 2021.
  36. B��rsch���Supan A, Brandt M, Hunkler C, et al. Data resource profile: the survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe (SHARE). Int J Epidemiology. 2013;42(4):992���1001. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyt088
  37. Or Z, Cases C, Lisac M, Vrangb��k K, Winblad U, Bevan G. Are health problems systemic? Politics of access and choice under Beveridge and Bismarck systems. Health Econ. Policy Law. 2010;5(3):269���293. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744133110000034
  38. Kozun���Cieslak G. Is the efficiency of the healthcare system linked to the country's economic performance? Beveridgeans versus Bismarckians. Acta Oecon. 2020;70:1���17. https://doi.org/10.1556/032.2020.00001
  39. Wagstaff A, Neelsen S. A comprehensive assessment of universal health coverage in 111 countries: a retrospective observational study. Lancet Global Health. 2020;8(1):e39���e49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214���109X(19)30463���2
  40. Horgan D. How can the EU beating cancer plan help in tackling cancer inequalities? Cancers. 2022;14(5):973.
  41. Paccagnella O, Rebba V, Webe G. Voluntary private health insurance among the over 50s in Europe. Health Econ. 2013;22(3):289���315.
  42. Tavares AI. Voluntary private health insurance demand determinants and risk preferences: evidence from SHARE. Int J Health Plann Manag. 2020;35(3):685���703. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2922
  43. Ades F, Senterre C, Azambuja ED, et al. Discrepancies in cancer incidence and mortality and its relationship to health expenditure in the 27 European Union member states. Ann Oncol: Official Journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology. 2013;24(11):2897���2902.
  44. Chi���Chih W, Wen���Wei S, Pei���Yi Y, Ko PY, Tsai MC. Favorable colorectal cancer mortality���to���incidence ratios in countries with high expenditures on health and development index: a study based on GLOBOCAN database. Medicine. 2021;100(41):e27414. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000027414
  45. Davis JL, Buchanan KL, Katz RV, Green BL. Gender differences in cancer screening beliefs, behaviors, and willingness to participate: implications for health promotion. Am J Men's Health. 2012;6(3):211���217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988311425853
  46. Fenton JJ, Cai Y, Weiss NS, et al. Delivery of cancer screening: how important is the preventive health examination? Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(6):580���585. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.167.6.580
  47. Rollet Q, Tron L, de Mil R, et al. Contextual factors associated with cancer screening uptake: a systematic review of observational studies. Prev Med. 2021;150:106692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106692
  48. Philipson TJ, Durie T, Cong Z, Fendrick AM. The aggregate value of cancer screenings in the United States: full potential value and value considering adherence. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):829. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913���023���09738���4
Journal Article
Article has an altmetric score of 1

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0healthprivateinsurancecancerscreeningmayEuropepeopleVoluntaryVPHISHAREcanexistsectorresultutilisationBACKGROUND:CancerleadingcausedeathpreventionmeasureslikethereforebecomingincreasinglyimportantAlthoughEuropeancountriesprovideuniversalcoverageincludingscreeningsmanyalsoAIM:aimstudyanalyserelationshipspecificallybreastcolorectalMETHOD:UsingdataSurveyHealthAgeingRetirementdifferentlogisticmultilevelregressionsestimatedRESULTS:majorfindingshowspositivecorrelationscreenedCONCLUSIONS:Threeconclusionsdrawn:advantageousselectionspillovereffectspublicturnlowerpremiumperpetuationinequalitiesserviceSeveralpolicyimplicationsdrawnrelevantconcernsnarrowinginequitiespotentiallyarisenotsurveyvoluntary

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.