US health care: single-payer or market reform

How do financial (dis)incentives influence health behaviour and costs? Protocol for a systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

In this era of rising healthcare costs, there is a growing interest in understanding how funding policies can be used to improve health and healthcare efficiency. Financial incentives (eg, vouchers or access to health insurance) or disincentives (eg, fines or out-of-pocket costs) affect behaviours. To date, reviews have explored the effects of financial (dis)incentives on patient health and behaviour by focusing on specific behaviours or geographical areas. The objective of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview on the use of financial (dis)incentives as a means of influencing health-related behaviour and costs in randomised trials.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search electronic databases, clinical trial registries and websites of health economic organisations for randomised controlled trials. The initial searches, which were conducted on 13 January 2018, will be updated every 12 months until the completion of data analysis. The reference lists of included studies will be manually screened to identify additional eligible studies. Two researchers will independently review titles, abstracts and full texts to determine eligibility according to a set of predetermined inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted from included studies using a form developed and piloted by the research team. Discrepancies will be resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required since this is a review of published data. Results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018097140.

Single payer health insurance in pediatric surgery: US impressions and Canadian experience

CONTEXT

Some advocate single payer national health insurance, present in Canada, as a solution to problems in US health care.

METHOD

Pediatric surgeons in the US and Canada were surveyed regarding their attitudes (US) and experience (Canada) under a single payer by electronic mail regarding features of a single payer using a Likert scale (1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree) on quality, administration, organization, and economics.

RESULTS

Overall response rate of 22% (175/835), 153 US, 22 Canadian. US and Canadian respondents predicted a higher quality of care for both emergency (66 and 36%, respectively) and elective conditions (47 and 9%) under a single payer. Both groups recognized delays for elective surgery. Better access to surgical care under a single payer, seen by most Canadians (81%), was not predicted among Americans (44%, p = 0.00012). Americans (68%) did not believe a single payer would address workforce shortages, while Canadians (68%) disagreed (p = 0.00001). Both groups agree (p = 0.7) that personal income is decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

US surgeons anticipate benefits and problems that Canadian surgeons with direct experience with a single payer do not experience. This discrepancy must be recognized during the ongoing debate over the future of US health care.