Travelling home for treatment and EU patients’ rights to care abroad: Results of a survey among German students at Maastricht University

With a little help from my (neighbouring) friends. 'Border region patient mobility' in the European Union: A policy analysis

Increased disparities in income and health care expenditure across EU countries may lead to an increase in patient mobility, which may, in turn, call for more action by the EU and its Member States. At present, patient mobility (or cross-border healthcare) is still a marginal phenomenon but is deemed to increase in the future. In this paper we examine border region patient mobility, defined as patients receiving care in a neighbouring country within a certain proximity. We examine, with the use of a spatial competition model, the options used to regulate such a patient flow and their welfare implications, both for patients and Governments. We show that marginal price costing would lead to an increase in patient welfare, whilst reducing the risk of increasing cost for the exporting country. At present there seems to be an East/West difference in the way these flows are regulated. In order to increase equity, we suggest that a 'joint implementation' of EU Directives by neighbouring Member States, especially in the field of cross-border healthcare, would allow Member States to define target populations (in terms of type of care and distance travelled) that could allow more freedom in terms of border care, without increasing health care expenditure. A future combination of the two existing legal frameworks in this field would also be more user- or patient-friendly.

Cross-border healthcare: A review and applicability to North America during COVID-19

Cross-border healthcare is an international agreement for the provision of out of country healthcare for citizens of partnered countries. The European Union (EU) has established itself as a world leader in cross-border healthcare. During the Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the EU used this system to maximize utilization of resources. Countries with capacity accepted critically ill patients from overwhelmed nations, borders remained open to healthcare workers and those seeking medical care in an effort to share the burden of this pandemic. Significant research into the challenges and successes of cross-border healthcare was completed prior to COVID-19, which demonstrated significant benefit for patients. In North America, the response to the COVID-19 crisis has been more isolationist. The Canada-United States border has been closed and bans placed on healthcare workers crossing the border for work. Prior to COVID-19, cross-border healthcare was rare in North America despite its need. We reviewed the literature surrounding cross-border healthcare in the EU, as well as the need for a similar system in North America. We found the EU cross-border healthcare agreements are generally mutually beneficial for participating countries. The North American literature suggested a cross-border healthcare system is feasible. A number of challenges could be identified based on the EU experience. A prior agreement may have been beneficial during the COVID-19 crisis as many Canadian healthcare institutions-maintained capacity to accept critically ill patients.

Patient mobility within national borders. Drivers and politics of cross-border healthcare agreements in the Spanish decentralized system

Cross-border patient mobility has become a topic of increasing interest for policy-makers and academic scholars. However, the focus on international dynamics hinders the fact that healthcare mobility takes place within national boundaries as well, particularly in countries characterized by decentralized health systems. This paper shifts the focus from the drivers of international patient mobility to the ones of policy-making on patient mobility within national borders, analyzing more than fifty policy arrangements adopted between Spanish Regions in the period 2000-2020. As the findings indicate, geographical/historical, economic and political factors are key to understanding the development of cross-border healthcare agreements, as well as the conflicts that may arise therefrom. Accordingly, these arrangements may become a controversial issue and a key arena for partisan competition, affecting the articulation of effective responses to patient mobility in Spain and, ultimately, patients' rights.

Health, federalism and the European Union: lessons from comparative federalism about the European Union

Bringing together the results of a large-scale review of European Union (EU) policies affecting health and a large-scale analysis of social policy and federalism, this paper uses comparative federalism to identify the scope and tensions of EU health policy at the end of the Juncker Commission. Viewing health care and public health policy through the lens of comparative federalism highlights some serious structural flaws in EU health policy. The regulatory state form in which the EU has evolved makes it difficult for the EU to formulate a health policy that actually focuses on health. Of the three faces of EU health policy, which are health policy, internal market policy and fiscal governance, health policy is legally, politically and financially the weakest. A comparison of the EU to other federations suggests that this creates basic weaknesses in the EU's design: its key powers are regulatory and its redistribution minimal. No federal welfare state so clearly pools risks at a low level while making markets so forcefully or creating rights whose costs are born by other levels of government. This structure, understandable in light of the EU's history and development, limits its health and social policy initiatives and might not be stable over the long term.

Cross-border spatial accessibility of health care in the North-East Department of Haiti

BACKGROUND

The geographical accessibility of health services is an important issue especially in developing countries and even more for those sharing a border as for Haiti and the Dominican Republic. During the last 2 decades, numerous studies have explored the potential spatial access to health services within a whole country or metropolitan area. However, the impacts of the border on the access to health resources between two countries have been less explored. The aim of this paper is to measure the impact of the border on the accessibility to health services for Haitian people living close to the Haitian-Dominican border.

METHODS

To do this, the widely employed enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method is applied. Four scenarios simulate different levels of openness of the border. Statistical analysis are conducted to assess the differences and variation in the E2SFCA results. A linear regression model is also used to predict the accessibility to health care services according to the mentioned scenarios.

RESULTS

The results show that the health professional-to-population accessibility ratio is higher for the Haitian side when the border is open than when it is closed, suggesting an important border impact on Haitians' access to health care resources. On the other hand, when the border is closed, the potential accessibility for health services is higher for the Dominicans.

CONCLUSION

The openness of the border has a great impact on the spatial accessibility to health care for the population living next to the border and those living nearby a road network in good conditions. Those findings therefore point to the need for effective and efficient trans-border cooperation between health authorities and health facilities. Future research is necessary to explore the determinants of cross-border health care and offers an insight on the spatial revealed access which could lead to a better understanding of the patients' behavior.

Who wants to cross borders in the EU for healthcare? An analysis of the Eurobarometer data in 2007 and 2014

Background

The European Union (EU) Directive on Patients' Rights in Cross-border Healthcare clarified the entitlements to medical care in other EU Member states. However, little is known about whether EU citizens have been travelling or are willing to travel to receive care. This study aimed to measure the determinants of cross-border patient mobility and willingness to travel to receive medical care in the EU, before and after the adoption of the Directive.

Methods

We used individual data from the Eurobarometer 210 (2007) and 425 (2014). In the 2 years, 53 439 EU citizens were randomly selected. We performed a logistic regression on the cross-border patient mobility and willingness to travel to other EU countries to use healthcare services as a function of the year (2007 or 2014), adjusting for age, gender, education and country size.

Results

In 2007, 3.3% of citizens reported cross-border mobility and 4.6% in 2014. The odds of cross-border patients' mobility were 11% higher in 2014, compared with 2007 [odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.21]. Also, mobility was 19% higher in males (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.08-1.30) and 20% higher amongst the more educated (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.09-1.31). However, the odds decreased 11% per decade of age (OR 0.89 per decade, 95% CI 0.85-0.93) and country size. In 2014, the willingness to travel decreased by 20% compared with 2007.

Conclusions

Cross-border patient mobility is more likely amongst the younger, the more educated and those from smaller countries. The directive does not seem to have promoted mobility at a large scale among the neediest citizens.

Regional incentives and patient cross-border mobility: evidence from the Italian experience

BACKGROUND

In recent years, accreditation of private hospitals followed by decentralisation of the Italian National Health Service (NHS) into 21 regional health systems has provided a good empirical ground for investigating the Tiebout principle of "voting with their feet". We examine the infra-regional trade-off between greater patient choice (due to an increase in hospital services supply) and financial equilibrium, and we relate it to the significant phenomenon of Cross-Border Mobility (CBM) between Italian regions. Focusing on the rules supervising the financial agreements between regional authorities and providers of hospital care, we find incentives for private accredited providers in attracting patient inflows.

METHODS

The analysis is undertaken from an institutional, regulatory and empirical perspective. We select a sample of five regions with higher positive CBM balance and we examine regional regulations governing the contractual agreements between purchasers and providers of hospital care. According to this sample, we provide a statistical analysis of CBM and apply a Regional Attraction Ability Index (RAAI), aimed at testing patient preferences for private/public accredited providers.

RESULTS

We find that this index is systematically higher for private providers, both in the case of distance/boundary patients and of excellence/general hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions address both financial issues regarding the coverage of regional healthcare systems and equity issues on patient healthcare access. They also raise concerns on the new European Union (EU) directive inherent to patient mobility across Europe.

Transnational healthcare practices of Romanian migrants in Ireland: inequalities of access and the privatisation of healthcare services in Europe

This article deals with the transnational healthcare practices of Central and Eastern European migrants in Europe, taking the case of Romanian migrants in Ireland. It explores the implications of migrants' transnational healthcare practices for the transformation of citizenship in Europe, more particularly in terms of access to free public healthcare. The article places these practices in the larger perspective of global care chains, seen as including transnational flows of healthcare seekers and healthcare workers that link distant healthcare systems in an emerging European healthcare assemblage. The study adopted a holistic perspective, taking into account both formal and informal practices, as well as the use of healthcare services in both the host and the origin countries of migrants. These were explored during multi-sited fieldwork in Romania and Ireland, conducted between 2012 and 2013, and combining a variety of sources and methods (semi-structured interviews, informal conversations, documentary analysis, etc.). The article explores the links between migrants' transnational healthcare practices and two other important processes: 1) inequalities in access to healthcare services in migrants' countries of origin and of destination; and 2) the contribution of healthcare privatisation to these inequalities. It shows that Romanian migrants' transnational healthcare practices function as strategies of social mobility for migrants, while also reflecting the increasing privatisation of healthcare services in Ireland and Romania. The article argues that these processes are far from specific to Ireland, Romania, and the migration flows uniting them. Rather, they draw our attention to the rise of an unevenly developed European healthcare assemblage and citizenship regime in which patients' movements across borders are closely interlinked with diminishing and increasingly unequal access to public healthcare services.

The possible effects of health professional mobility on access to care for patients

The chapter explains how health professional mobility impacts on the resources and capacity available within a health system, and how this affects service delivery and access. The contrasting experiences of destination countries, which receive foreign inflows of health professionals, and of source countries, which loose workforce due to outflows, are illustrated with country examples. The evidence opens the debate on how EU countries compete for health workforce, what this means for resource-strained, crisis-hit Member States, and whether there is any room for intra-European solidarity. The nexus between patient mobility and health professional mobility is moreover highlighted. This take on free mobility in the EU has received little attention, and while evidence is scarce, it calls for careful analysis when considering the possible effects of free movement on access to care in national health systems. The chapter reformulates the question on 'who wins' and 'who looses' from freedom of movement in the EU to turn our attention away from those who go abroad for care and instead focus on those who stay at home.

Evaluation of an integrated system for classification, assessment and comparison of services for long-term care in Europe: the eDESDE-LTC study

Background

The harmonization of European health systems brings with it a need for tools to allow the standardized collection of information about medical care. A common coding system and standards for the description of services are needed to allow local data to be incorporated into evidence-informed policy, and to permit equity and mobility to be assessed. The aim of this project has been to design such a classification and a related tool for the coding of services for Long Term Care (DESDE-LTC), based on the European Service Mapping Schedule (ESMS).

Methods

The development of DESDE-LTC followed an iterative process using nominal groups in 6 European countries. 54 researchers and stakeholders in health and social services contributed to this process. In order to classify services, we use the minimal organization unit or “Basic Stable Input of Care” (BSIC), coded by its principal function or “Main Type of Care” (MTC). The evaluation of the tool included an analysis of feasibility, consistency, ontology, inter-rater reliability, Boolean Factor Analysis, and a preliminary impact analysis (screening, scoping and appraisal).

Results

DESDE-LTC includes an alpha-numerical coding system, a glossary and an assessment instrument for mapping and counting LTC. It shows high feasibility, consistency, inter-rater reliability and face, content and construct validity. DESDE-LTC is ontologically consistent. It is regarded by experts as useful and relevant for evidence-informed decision making.

Conclusion

DESDE-LTC contributes to establishing a common terminology, taxonomy and coding of LTC services in a European context, and a standard procedure for data collection and international comparison.