↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to universal health coverage in Republic of Moldova: a policy analysis of formal and informal out-of-pocket payments

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Barriers to universal health coverage in Republic of Moldova: a policy analysis of formal and informal out-of-pocket payments
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0984-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taryn Vian, Frank G. Feeley, Silviu Domente, Ala Negruta, Andrei Matei, Jarno Habicht

Abstract

Universal Health Coverage seeks to assure that everyone can obtain the health services they need without financial hardship. Countries which rely heavily on out-of-pocket (OOP) payments, including informal payments (IP), to finance total health expenditures are not likely to achieve universal coverage. The Republic of Moldova is committed to promoting universal coverage, reducing inequities, and expanding financial protection. To achieve these goals, the country must reduce the proportion of total health expenditures paid by households. This study documents the extent of OOP payments and IP in Moldova, analyses trends over time, and identifies factors which may be driving these payments. The study includes analysis of household budget survey data and previous research and policy documents. The team also conducted a review of administrative law intended to control OOP payments and IPs. Focus groups, interviews, and a policy dialogue with key stakeholders were held to validate and discuss findings. OOP payments account for 45 % of total health expenditures. Sixteen percent of outpatients and 30 % of inpatients reporting that they made OOP payments when seeking care at a health facility in 2012, more than two-thirds of whom also reported paying for medicines at a pharmacy. Among those who paid anything, 36 % of outpatients and 82 % of inpatients reported paying informally, with the proportion increasing over time for inpatient care. Although many patients consider these payments to be gifts, around one-third of IPs appear to be forced, posing a threat to health care access. Patients perceive that payments are driven by the limited list of reimbursable medicines, a desire to receive better treatment, and fear or extortion. Providers suggested irrational prescribing and ordering of tests as drivers. Providers may believe that IPs are gifts and do not cause harm for patients and the health system in general. Efforts to expand financial protection should focus on reducing household spending on medicines and hospital-based IPs. Reforms should consider ways to reduce medicine prices and promote rational use, strengthen administrative controls, and increase incentives for quality health care provision.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 117 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Researcher 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 7 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 36 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 26%
Social Sciences 13 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 38 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2021.
All research outputs
#6,423,341
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,104
of 7,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,072
of 264,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#49
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.