The present study aimed to investigate the status of the determinants of exposure to catastrophic healthcare expenditures in the hospitalized patients, at the selected hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran, during 2013. Based on the findings of this study, 175 hospitalized patients (47.3%) were faced with catastrophic healthcare expenditures. Different household surveys, in different regions of Iran, have reported this rate to vary from 11.8% to 24% (
7,
9,
14). Also, several studies have indicated the rising trend of this exposure, among which the one performed by Razavi et al. is worth mentioning. In this study, the proportion of the households exposed to catastrophic healthcare expenditures was estimated to be 1.97% in 1997 and 2.32% in 2002 (
6). A study performed by WHO about Iran also confirmed the high percentage of the households that were exposed to catastrophic expenditures. This percentage ranged from 2.2% to 2.5%, between 1995 and 2007 (
8). Studies conducted on catastrophic healthcare expenditures have surveyed the costs of the households or a particular disease. Therefore, since the target population was the inpatients who referred to service delivery centers to receive health services in any event, factors such as poverty or lack of physical and geographical access did not prevent them from not consuming health services, self-care, or going to traditional healers. Others have announced that this vast difference might result from the limited number of samples, as well as from different data and sampling instruments (
9). Therefore, there is a significant difference among the results obtained from local and national studies, regarding the percentage of the households exposed to catastrophic health expenditures. This suggests that health policy makers, at any level, should measure changes in health system performance, identify the factors influencing the health system, and develop policies that allow achieving better results at national and international levels. The findings of the current study demonstrated a significant relationship between hospital type and exposure to catastrophic healthcare expenditures. Accordingly, the chance of exposure to catastrophic expenditures was almost 7.2 times higher among the hospitalized patients in the semi-private hospital, compared to those hospitalized in the public hospital. It seems that in Iran, due to long waiting time in public hospitals and also, physical distances of the contracted insurance providers, people have to use private hospitals services and higher tariffs of services in the private sector lead to higher payments. Dressler (2005) argues that the use of several healthcare services, provided by private providers and regional hospitals, constitute an important factor in imposing expenditures on poor people. Long distance from free and cheaper providers forces poor people to use more expensive, although closer, in terms of distance, services (
19). The present study results also indicated a significant relationship between exposure to catastrophic healthcare expenditures and admission ward. Based on the results, in comparison to the patients hospitalized in NICU, the chance of exposure to catastrophic expenditures was 41.6, 13, 14, 11, and three times higher among the patients in ICU, general internal, CCU, general surgery, and post-CCU, respectively. The higher expenditures of the critical wards can be the reason for the higher chance of being encountered with catastrophic expenditures. Furthermore, a significant relationship was found between the mean duration of hospitalization and the time of diagnosis and the risk of encountering catastrophic health expenditures (P < 0.001). As
Table 2 depicts, no significant difference was observed between the patients exposed and not exposed to catastrophic expenditures, regarding the duration of diagnosis. Despite the expectation that early diagnosis leads to earlier intervention, thereby reducing the overall treatment expenditures, it seems that this issue did not have any impacts on reduction of expenditures among the patients under study. Yet, the duration of hospitalization was 1.11 days higher among the patients exposed to catastrophic healthcare expenditures, compared to the non-exposed group. Similarly, Sue and colleagues (2006) concluded that increase in the length and number of courses of treatment increased the risk of catastrophic healthcare expenditures (
20). Kavosi et al. (
9), Rivero et al. (
15), and Qyasvand et al. (
12) and Bazyar (
21) also confirmed a relationship between increased consumption of inpatient services and frequency of hospitalization and risk of exposure to catastrophic expenditures. Generally, the increase in the number of hospitalizations results in increases in the rate of consumed services, eventually enhancing the risk of exposure to catastrophic expenditures. According to the structure of the payment system in Iran’s hospitals, which is faced with serious problems, such as challenges resulting from inappropriate and unbalanced tariffs (
22), continuous challenge between insurance organizations and hospitals (
23), and demand for induced services imposing additional expenditures (
23), it is important to consider all the factors affecting exposure to catastrophic expenditures, with the aim of reducing the impact of hospital services. In such a context, the implementation and completion of insurance coverage can be helpful. According to WHO's report in 2010, universal coverage can be an appropriate strategy for protecting households against health expenditures (
24). The results of the present study showed that, although the percentage of the households facing catastrophic expenditures in the basic insurance group was lower, compared to the group without basic insurance; the difference was not statistically significant. However, supplementary insurances played an effective role in protecting the patients against the financial burdens caused by diseases. According to the results, the probability of exposure to catastrophic healthcare expenditures increased by 3.2 times in the patients whose household heads were not covered by supplementary insurance, compared to those who had supplementary insurance. This fact contains this message for Iran’s health policy makers and insurance organizations that, although the number of people who are covered by health insurance system is in a good condition, reconsideration is necessary, in terms of service packages and expenditures-sharing requirements. Although it seems that the gap between services and expenditures of supplementary insurance is covered by basic insurance, because the supplementary insurance premiums are high and may not be afforded by the weak economic quintiles, the government should pay subsidy in order to support people with lower income levels to use supplementary insurance or even reconsider the service packages of the basic insurance. Qyasvand et al. (
12) and Keshavarz et al. (
25) also believed in the effectiveness of having supplemental insurance coverage in several treatment expenditures. The results of the present study did not show any significant relationship between exposure to catastrophic healthcare expenditures and household size (P = 0.46) and having a member over 65 years of age (P = 0.52). Nevertheless, the households with one‒two members and those without members above 65 years of age were faced with catastrophic expenditures at an increased rate. In a study in Thailand, a very weak relationship was found between household size and exposure to catastrophic expenditures (
25). However, according to the study by Mehrara et al. (
23), further adjusted household size would increase exposure to catastrophic expenditures (
23). In addition, Razavi et al. (
6), Ranson et al. (
24) and Kavosi et al. (
9) disclosed that existence of a person over 65 years old in the household was effective in causing catastrophic expenditures. Although any person over 65 years of age needs more healthcare compared to normal people and, therefore, the existence of such a person in the household will be more likely to lead to greater spending of household’s capacity to pay for health expenditures, the results of our study did not show any significant relationship in this respect. Since this result was not in accordance with that of most studies, it needs to be investigated more closely. Generally, lack of complete coverage by insurances, expensive healthcare expenditures and economic disadvantages that have a considerable role in exposure to catastrophic expenditures force patients to adopt a variety of strategies to cope with them. In the present study, 53.2% of the households made use of borrowing-from-strangers strategy and other strategies employed to pay the healthcare expenditures, which included selling assets (49.1%), current income (48%), savings (47.8%), borrowing from friends and relatives (47%), taking a loan (42.6%) and insurance charge (39.4%). Whitehead et al. (
26), Damme et al. (
27), Ensor et al. (
28), and Morduch et al. (
29) also reported borrowing, while Skarbinski et al. (
30), Kamolratanakul et al. (
31), and Peters et al. (
32) mentioned selling assets, as the dominant strategies to smooth consumption during health shocks. In several cases, the strategy used to deal with high health expenditures is not highly significant, although it will have an adverse effect on the household. For example, the households with low assets and without savings or access to social networking to get help use their current income to pay for health expenditures. Besides, in order to increase their ability to pay, they will use other household expenses, such as children's education and clothing expenditures. This, on the long term, will have negative effects on the household's social status (34). Therefore, in addition to imposing immediate shocks on households, health expenditures and, particularly, catastrophic expenditures may throw households into a disease-poverty trap on the long term due to the methods used to deal with these expenditures. The results of this study indicate that, although contribution of patients to financing treatment, preventing moral hazards, and creating patient efficiency might be the goals of the health system, this should not jeopardize one of the most important goals of the health system; i.e. providing medical services for patients (
2). The high percentage of households facing catastrophic expenditure in hospitalized patient showed an expenditure bottleneck in the health system. Therefore, if the health system has planned to reduce this indicator, a strategic point, which should be considered, is represented by hospitals. Moreover, the health system should develop health policy which encourage treatment in non-hospital level institutions of the health system, such as home care, family physician office, which put lesser expenditure on patients and, in turn, health system, as a whole.
This study, like other studies on household expenditures, had several limitations, including the recall bias of the expenditures by the patients, which was largely reduced by shortening the recall period and using the patients’ billing documentation.