The risk of losing health insurance in the United States is large, and remained so after the Affordable Care Act.

Health insurance coverage in the United States is highly uncertain. In the post-Affordable Care Act (ACA), pre-COVID United States, we estimate that while 12.5% of individuals under 65 are uninsured at a point in time, twice as many-one in four-are uninsured at some point over a 2-y period. Moreover, the risk of losing insurance remained virtually unchanged with the introduction of the landmark ACA. Risk of insurance loss is particularly high for those with health insurance through Medicaid or private exchanges; they have a 20% chance of losing coverage at some point over a 2-y period, compared to 8.5% for those with employer-provided coverage. Those who lose insurance can experience prolonged periods without coverage; about half are still uninsured 6 mo later, and almost one-quarter are uninsured for the subsequent 2 y. These facts suggest that research and policy attention should focus not only on the "headline number" of the share of the population uninsured at a point in time, but also on the stability and certainty (or lack thereof) of being insured.

COVID-19 pandemic and mental healthcare: Impact on health insurance with guaranteed universal access in Chile.

Background: Universal health coverage (UHC) is a goal of the member states of the United Nations. The negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, inequalities in access to care, and financing gaps set a problematic scenario for universal mental health coverage. In Latin America, depression and anxiety disorders have increased by more than 30%. Chile implemented a reform for UHC in 2005 generating a mandatory guaranteed plan for health insurance (GES) that covers schizophrenia, depression, bipolar disorders, and Alzheimer's disease. We assume that the pandemic increased cases of mental illness in GES of public and private insurance. Objectives: This study aimed to explore the effects of the pandemic on the use of the GES mental health plan of public and private insurance. Methods: A descriptive analysis of secondary data from public and private insurance on the use and expenditure of the GES plan in mental illness between 2005 and 2020 was carried out. An aggregate analysis of the use of psychiatric consultations without a guaranteed plan and sick leave was performed. Results: Between 2005 and 2020, 18.5% of GES cases corresponded to four mental health illnesses (1,682,021 cases). Public insurance covered 80% of cases. In the pandemic, cases of mental illness fell by 10.5% in public insurance and 28.7% in private ones, reducing spending by 33 and 6.2%, respectively. Psychiatric consultations without using the GES plan doubled in 2020 in private insurance, and medical discharges due to mental illness also increased. Leave due to mental illness increased by 20% in both types of insurance. Conclusion: The results suggest that the demand for mental healthcare increased during the pandemic, but public and private health insurance reduced admissions to the GES universal plan for schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder. A universal guaranteed plan in an individual contribution system can have essential weaknesses for people when the principles of social security are not complied with, especially concerning the solidarity of the health insurance system.

Pattern of OPD utilisation during the COVID-19 pandemic under the Universal Coverage Scheme in Thailand: what can 850 million records tell us?

BACKGROUND: Out-patient department (OPD) is a crucial component of the healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries including Thailand. A considerable impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and its control measures, especially the lockdown, on utilisation of OPD services was expected. This study thus aims to estimate the pattern of OPD utilisation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand including overall utilisation and within each sub-groups including diagnostic group, age group, and health region. METHODS: This study was a secondary data analysis of aggregated outpatient data from patients covered under the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) in Thailand over a 4-year period (2017-2020). Interrupted time series analyses and segmented Quasi-Poisson regression were used to examine the impact of COVID-19 on the overall OPD utilisation including the impact on each diagnostic group, age groups, health regions, and provinces. RESULTS: Analysis of 845,344,946 OPD visits in this study showed a seasonal pattern and increasing trend in monthly OPD visits before the COVID-19 pandemic. A 28% (rate ratio (RR) 0.718, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.631-0.819) and 11% (RR 0.890, 95% CI: 0.811-0.977) reduction in OPD visits was observed during the lockdown and post-lockdown periods, respectively, when compared to the pre-lockdown period. Diseases of respiratory system were most affected with a RR of 0.411 (95% CI: 0.320-0.527), while the number of visits for non-communicable diseases (ICD-10: E00-E90, I00-I99) and elderly (> 60 years) dropped slightly. The post-lockdown trend in monthly OPD visits gradually increased to the pre-pandemic levels in most groups. CONCLUSIONS: Thailand's OPD utilisation rate during the COVID-19 lockdown decreased in some diseases, but the service for certain group of patients appeared to remain available. After the COVID-19 lockdown, the rate returned to the pre-pandemic level in a timely manner. Equipped with a knowledge of OPD utilisation pattern during COVID-19 based on a national real-world database could aid with a better preparation of healthcare system for future pandemics.

Effectiveness of a community-integrated intermediary care (CIIC) service model to enhance family-based long-term care for Thai older adults in Chiang Mai, Thailand: a cluster-randomized controlled trial TCTR20190412004.

BACKGROUND: Populations around the world are ageing faster, with the majority living in low- and middle-income countries where health and social care are yet to be universal and inclusive for the ageing population. This community-integrated intermediary care (CIIC) model is a novel prevention-based, long-term care model enhancing the family-based care system traditionally practised in Thailand and neighbouring Asian countries, and many low-and middle-income countries globally. This study assessed the effectiveness of the CIIC model in Chiang Mai, Thailand. METHODS: The two-arm parallel intervention study was designed as a cluster-randomized controlled trial. The study population at randomization and analysis was 2788 participants: 1509 in six intervention clusters and 1279 in six control clusters. The research protocol was approved by the WHO Research Ethics Review Committee (WHO/ERC ID; ERC.0003064). The CIIC service intervention model is a combination of formal care and informal care in a subdistrict setting consisting of three components: (1) care prevention delivered as community group exercise and home exercise; (2) care capacity-building of the family caregiver; and (3) community respite service. The primary outcome was family caregivers' burden at 6-month follow-up, and secondary outcome was activities of daily living. Analysis applied the intention-to-treat approach using cluster-level analysis via STATA 16 SE. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics did not differ between the two arms. Loss of follow up was 3.7%. Mean age of the participants was 69.53 years. Women constituted 60%. The COVID-19 pandemic caused delayed implementation. The proportion of families with reduced caregiver burden at 6-month follow-up was higher among the intervention clusters (mean 39.4%) than control clusters (mean 28.62%). The intervention clusters experienced less functional decline and fewer people with depression. CONCLUSIONS: When communities are integrated for preventing care, and families are empowered for giving care, it is possible to secure universal access to health and social care for the older persons, with basic resources mobilized from communities. This study had shown the CIIC model as an effective and potential step to the realization of universal health and long-term care coverage being inclusive of ageing populations in Thailand and globally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at the Thailand Clinical Trial Registry-Trial registration number TCTR20190412004, https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/.