Back to Journals » Risk Management and Healthcare Policy » Volume 15

Determinants of Out-of-Network Utilization of Care Among Insured Clients Under the National Health Insurance Fund of Sudan

Authors Elhadi YAM , Zaghloul AAZ , El Dabbah NA 

Received 26 February 2022

Accepted for publication 8 April 2022

Published 21 April 2022 Volume 2022:15 Pages 765—777

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S364207

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Jongwha Chang



Yasir Ahmed Mohammed Elhadi, Ashraf Ahmed Zaher Zaghloul, Noha Ahmed El Dabbah

Department of Health Administration and Behavioral Sciences, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Correspondence: Yasir Ahmed Mohammed Elhadi, Department of Health Administration and Behavioral Sciences, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, 165 El Horrya Avenue, Alexandria, Egypt, Tel +20 1556494566, Email [email protected]

Purpose: Knowledge of insured clients’ utilization behavior is essential for developing evidence-based interventions for reform activities. This study explored the magnitude and determinants of voluntary out-of-network physician visit utilization among an insured population under the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) of Sudan.
Methods: This study was a cross-sectional survey conducted at the primary healthcare centers of NHIF in Al Jazirah state in Sudan. A structured interview questionnaire was used to collect data related to socio-economic and health insurance characteristics of NHIF clients and to assess their utilization behavior. Data were collected from September to October 2021.
Results: Of 768 NHIF clients who were interviewed (mean age 46 years, 55.1% females), 63.2% reported using out-of-network physician visits during the last six months prior to the interview. The median out-of-pocket payment for the last out-of-network physician visit was 5000 Sudanese pounds. The regression analysis revealed that clients’ gender, marital status, self-reported health, overall rating of the quality of care, rating of the general practitioner care, and ease of referral to a specialist were the significant determinants for seeking out-of-network physician care.
Conclusion: A high magnitude of out-of-network physician visit utilization was found among the insured NHIF clients of Al Jazirah state in Sudan. Policymakers should address issues identified in the current study to reduce patients’ leakage to out-of-network services.

Keywords: out-of-network, physician visit, health insurance, healthcare utilization, Sudan

Introduction

Sudan is a low- middle-income country that spends about 6.5% of its gross domestic product and 8.2% of the general government expenditure on health.1 The main sources of general government health expenditures are federal (5.49%) and state (20.84%) shares. While the total private health expenditure represents 73.14% of the total health expenditures (THEs), 70% of the THEs are out-of-pocket and this translates to 84.24 US$ per capita, which implies low government expenditure on health.2

There are different health insurance schemes in Sudan: the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF), which covers all states of Sudan except the capital Khartoum, Khartoum State Health Insurance, and Police and Military Insurances.3 The NHIF is a governmental organization that was established in Sudan in 1995.4 By 2021, the NHIF covered 81.7% of the Sudanese population. The beneficiaries of Al Jazirah state, located in east-central Sudan, represent 27% of NHIF clients and enjoy comprehensive coverage of health services through the NHIF primary healthcare clinics and hospitals.5

Out-of-network use of health services results when patients within a health system’s designated population receive care from providers outside of that system.6 The conceptualization and measurement of using out-of-network care differ among studies. Kyanko et al provided a conceptual framework that classified out-of-network care into voluntary choice and involuntary use of an out-of-network physician, and both were said to be influenced by three domains; patient, encounter, and system.7 Involuntary searching for out-of-network care occurs in situations where the patients are unaware of the provider-network status at the time of service use (eg; unconscious patients), while voluntary out-of-network utilization of care implies individual preferences play a role in choosing a healthcare provider outside the health insurance coverage plan.7 The latter differs in that the insured client voluntarily chooses to obtain health services from outside-network providers even though the service was available and would have been covered in-network at lower or no cost.8,9 While both lead to an increase in out-of-pocket payments among the insured population, involuntary out-of-network utilization is associated with unexpected expenses; that is, “surprise billing,” which has serious implications on the financial security of insured clients and is most common among privately insured clients.9–11 On the other hand, seeking voluntary out-of-network care includes a dimension of client satisfaction with their health plans.8 Utilization of out-of-network services has been described with different synonyms including out-of-plan utilization, outside utilization, and leakage.8,12–14

The reported reasons for such utilization behaviors include the urgency and seriousness of the need for care, perceived quality of care, relationship with the physician, lack of confidence in a physician’s competence, and needed care during non-working hours of health insurance clinics.8 Additionally, among adolescent Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) enrollees in the United States, the main reported reasons for utilizing reproductive health services outside the HMO network were lack of convenience and physical inaccessibility.15 Insurance transition was reported to influence the pattern of care utilization, as out-of-network physician visit utilization increases when beneficiaries have recently resigned from a plan or changed their health insurance.16 In Medicare accountable care organizations in the United States, out-of-network care utilization was associated with higher spending in outpatient settings.14 Out-of-network utilization can lead to further decline in the quality of health insurance facilities, decreasing public support for the facilities used by government employees, and increases in out-of-pocket payments.8,17

The World Health Organization defined out-of-pocket payments (OOP) as:

The direct payments made by individuals to health care providers at the time of service, excluding any prepayment for health services in the form of taxes or specific insurance premiums or contributions and, when possible, net of any reimbursements to the individual who made the payments.18

High OOP is a marker of health system performance.19 Previous research has shown that OOP is prevalent among insured populations, especially in low and middle-income countries; for instance, in the population with health insurance in Indonesia, 18% of patients experienced catastrophic medical costs.20 This was also true in the population of India with National Health Insurance in that 66.0% of the beneficiaries incurred OOP.21

In our search, there were no previous studies in Sudan that investigated the utilization behavior of insured clients in general and clients seeking out-of-network care in particular. This study aimed to investigate the magnitude and determinants of out-of-network physician visit utilization among a representative sample of insured clients in Al Jazirah state in east-central Sudan.

Materials and Methods

This study is part of a comprehensive survey that explored the magnitude and determinants of out-of-network primary health care utilization among an insured population under the NHIF in Sudan.22

Study Design, Setting, and Population

This was a cross-sectional survey conducted at the primary healthcare centers of the NHIF (Direct Services Provision Centers-DPCs) in Al Jazirah state in east-central Sudan. There are eight primary DPCs of NHIF distributed throughout seven districts in Al Jazirah state. The target population consisted of insured clients, 18 years or older, attending NHIF primary care clinics in Al Jazirah state at the time of data collection. Only patients visiting a general practitioner (GP) were included in the current study. Patients who were referred to a specialist consultation were excluded due to the higher severity of their illness.

Sampling Design

According to the NHIF statistical report of 2021, the total estimated number of beneficiaries in Al Jazirah state was 3,568,079 clients, assuming a 50% expected magnitude for out-of-network physician visit utilization. Using an alpha error of 0.05, the design effect equaled 2, and the margin of error was 5%; the minimum required sample size was found to be 768 NHIF clients. The sample size was calculated using Epi info 7 software.23 All eight DPCs of the NHIF in Al Jazirah state were included in the study. Proportional sampling was used to determine the required number of beneficiaries at each of the DPCs, based on average monthly visits. The eight DPCs were visited sequentially. When the required number of clients was reached, the investigators shifted to the next DPC. At each DPC, rooms assigned to GPs were listed to obtain a sampling frame of rooms. Each day the investigators randomly selected one of the rooms from the sampling frame using folded papers. Patients were examined in the selected room during GP clinic working hours and patients who agreed to participate in the study were interviewed.

Study Outcomes

The main outcomes of this study were the prevalence and determinants of seeking out-of-network physician care during the six months prior to the interview. Participants were coded as (out-of-network users = 0) and (NHIF users only = 1).

  • Out-of-network users: NHIF clients who reported seeking out-of-network physician care during the six months prior to the interview.
  • NHIF users only: NHIF clients seeking care only within the NHIF physicians’ network during the six months prior to the interview.

Data Collection

A pre-coded, structured, and interviewer-administered questionnaire based on reviewing the published literature was used to gather the required information.8 The interview questionnaire was composed of three sections. The first section comprised the participant’s socio-economic characteristics (age, sex, family income expressed in Sudanese pounds (SDG), education, and marital status), and health insurance characteristics (period of enrollment in the NHIF plan, number of visits to NHIF clinics during the six months prior to the interview, number of dependents, and presence of additional health insurance).

The second section explored participants’ utilization behaviors (whether they voluntarily utilized out-of-network physician visits during the six months prior to the interview or not) and perceived quality of care. Participants were asked to rate the quality of certain aspects of care at NHIF clinics (ie, overall quality rating, GP technical care, staff courtesy, and ease of referral from a GP to a specialist). The rating was done on a 3-point Likert scale (Good - Fair- Poor).8 Other data items in this section included perceived waiting time (long vs reasonable), self-reported health status, the number of chronic diseases, and whether the participant was seeking a second opinion. The last third section was only for participants who reported using out-of-network services in the six months prior to the interview. It was about details of the last out-of-network physician visit used (out-of-pocket expenses in Sudanese pounds, site, and the main reason for seeking out-of-network care). The internal consistency of the subscales used in the current study was examined using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient (α = 0.882), which indicated the overall measurement was reliable. Data collection took place on Saturday, Monday, and Thursday, from September, 13th to October, 25th, 2021, using the kobo toolbox, a software developed by the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative for mobile data collection in challenging field settings.24

Ethical Statement

The current study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standard.25 The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the High Institute of Public Health at Alexandria University, Egypt. This study was also approved by the Ethics, Research, and Technical Committees of the National Health Insurance Fund in Sudan. Written consent was taken from all study participants after an explanation of the purpose and benefits of the research. Anonymity and confidentiality of the study participants were assured and the right to withdraw at any time was clearly stated at the beginning of the interview.

Statistical Analysis

Data were fed to the computer and analyzed using IBM SPSS software package version 20.0. (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp).26 The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to verify the normality of the distribution of variables. Descriptive statistics were given using number (N) and percent (%). We carried out a series of cross-tabulations (bivariate analysis) to identify variables significantly associated with the pattern of physician visit utilization. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was carried out to detect the significant determinants of out-of-network users. The significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level of alpha error.

Results

Table 1 presents respondents’ socio-economic characteristics, self-reported health status, and attitude toward medical care according to their pattern of care utilization (in-network or out-of-network). Of 768 interviewed NHIF clients (mean age 46 years, 55.1% females), 63.2% had reported using out-of-network physician visits in the six months prior to the interview. Most out-of-network users were males (51.8%), among the age group 40 to <50 years (30.9%), married (65.8%), with two chronic diseases (39%), and with a university or higher degree of education (39%). In addition, the higher percentage of out-of-network users were among clients in the higher income group (57.9%), with more than three family members dependent on their insurance (81.9%), and with a good self-perceived health status (45.6%). Participants who sometimes or usually sought a second opinion constituted 38.1% of the out-of-network users and 27.3% of the NHIF users only. There were statistically significant differences between the out-of-network users and NHIF users only for all the estimated variables for participants’ socio-economic characteristics, health status, and attitude toward medical care.

Table 1 Respondents’ Socioeconomic Characteristics, Health Status, and Attitude Towards Medical Care

Table 2 shows the participants’ health insurance characteristics according to their pattern of care utilization. Most out-of-network users were enrolled in the NHIF plan for 5–9 years (52.6%), and with a smaller percentage of insured children compared to NHIF users only. The average number of visits to NHIF clinics during the six months prior to the interview was relatively higher among NHIF users only. Concerning dual insurance, the majority of both out-of-network users and NHIF users only had no additional insurance. There were statistically significant differences among the two groups concerning their period of enrollment, the number of visits to NHIF clinics during the six months prior to the interview, and the number of insured children (p < 0.001).

Table 2 Participants’ Health Insurance Characteristics According to Their Pattern of Utilization (n=768)

Respondents’ perceived quality of different aspects of NHIF ambulatory services are listed in Table 3 according to their pattern of care utilization. The overall rating for the quality of care provided was perceived as good by 26.1% of the NHIF users as compared to only 17.5% of the out-of-network users. Regarding GP technical care, it was perceived as fair by more than half of the out-of-network users (62.5%). The ratings for staff courtesy were perceived as nearly the same by the two groups of NHIF clients under study. The waiting time at the NHIF clinics was perceived as long by a considerable proportion of out-of-network users (70.3%). More than two-thirds of out-of-network users perceived the referral to a specialist within the NHIF network as difficult (69.3%), in comparison to 34.3% of NHIF users only. A significant difference was detected between out-of-network users and NHIF users only in all measured aspects of the quality of NHIF ambulatory services except for staff courtesy.

Table 3 Respondents’ Perceived Quality of Different Aspects of NHIF Ambulatory Services According to Their Pattern of Care Utilization (n=768)

Shown in Table 4 are the characteristics of the last out-of-network service utilized by NHIF clients who participated in the current study, the median out-of-pocket expenses on the last out-of-network physician visit was 5000 Sudanese pounds equals about 10$ United States Dollars. The most common site for utilizing physician care services outside the NHIF network was private hospitals (65.8%). The main reason for seeking out-of-network care was the urgent and serious cases reported by 53.4% of out-of-network users.

Table 4 Characteristics of the Last Out-of-Network Service Utilized by NHIF Clients (n=485)

The results of stepwise logistic regression analysis for the determinants of using out-of-network physician care among NHIF clients are shown in Table 5. Stepwise regression for 16 significant factors through univariate analysis between out-of-network users and NHIF users only resulted in a model that included six variables: namely, gender, marital status, self-reported health status, overall rating of the quality of care, rating of GP technical care, and ease of referral to a specialist [Model chi-squared = 67.069* (p < 0.001)]. Regarding gender, females were more than three times more likely to be out-of-network users than males [OR = 3.5, (95% CI 2.19–5.61), p < 0.001]. In reference to married NHIF clients, single clients and divorced/widowed clients were more than two times likely to be out-of-network users [OR = 2.21, (95% CI 1.28–3.80), p= 0.004 and OR = 2.17, (95% CI 1.28–3.66), p= 0.004, respectively]. Clients who perceive their health as good, poor, or fair had two-times increased odds to be out-of-network users compared to clients with excellent self-reported health status. On the other hand, clients who perceived the overall quality of care at NHIF clinics or GP technical care as fair were less likely to be out-of-network users than clients with a good perceived overall quality of care or GP technical care [OR = 0.42 (95% CI 0.25–0.73), p= 0.002 and OR = 0.52 (95% CI 0.31–0.85), p= 0.01, respectively]. NHIF clients who perceived difficulty in the process of referral to a specialist were less likely to be out-of-network users than those who experienced easiness in the referral process [OR = 0.22 (95% CI 0.12–0.38), p < 0.001].

Table 5 Stepwise Logistic Regression Analysis for Determinants of Out-of-Network Physician Care Utilization Among NHIF Clients

Discussion

This was the first study of insured clients’ utilization behavior in Sudan that aimed to assess the prevalence and determinants of seeking out-of-network physician care among nationally insured clients. The current study showed a high magnitude of out-of-network physician visit utilization at 63.2%. It seems that out-of-network utilization of care is prevalent in developing as well as in developed countries; for instance, the magnitude of out-of-network services utilization among clients of the Health Insurance Organization (HIO) in Egypt was 70.7%, where clients utilized at least one out-of-network health service per year. The out-of-network physician visits were 66.6% with a mean out-of-pocket payment of 100 Egyptian pounds.8 In addition, a study among adolescent HMO enrollees in the United States showed 69% had utilized reproductive health services outside the HMO network.15 Additionally, a recent study among United States veterans with rheumatoid arthritis enrolled in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system indicated that among dual care users 65% reported having a non‐VA primary care provider and 50% reported having a non‐VA specialist. However, only 6% of the study population were reported to use a non-VA specialist consultation.12 It is important to note that studies differed in the conceptualization and measurement of out-of-network utilization of care, which limits the comparison of the current study results to other studies around the globe.

Characteristics of Out-of-Network Users

Regarding determinants for utilizing out-of-network physician care, the current study results showed that females are more than three times more likely to be out-of-network users compared to males. This could be due to several factors. Studies have shown that there are gender differences in the utilization of care and female adults have higher healthcare utilization than males, especially for GP visits.27–29 Women tend to use significantly more services and incur more out-of-pocket costs than men.30,31 Moreover, studies have also shown that women make more primary care visits and receive more diagnostic services, screening services, diet and nutrition counseling, and sexual health care than men, even though men generally have higher rates of obesity and cardiovascular problems.29,32 Another contributing factor may be the increased gender physician preference among females. The absence of a preferred gender physician in-network may have pushed respondents to receive care from the desired gender provider out-of-network. In previous research that assessed the Social Health Insurance (SHI) in Sudan, a significant number of respondents reported that the list of SHI providers lacks important specialties.33 Studies have shown that female gender preference exists, especially among obstetrics and gynecology clinic attendees.34 However, a study among an insured population in the United States concluded that patient-side demand or patients’ preferences were relatively unimportant in explaining variations in health care expenditures.35 Overall, these findings should draw the attention of health policymakers in Sudan to pay more attention to women’s health needs and reduce access barriers to reproductive health services in Sudan, which were regarded as a pressing health challenge in the region.36

The present study revealed that unmarried clients were more likely to be out-of-network users and thus incur more out-of-pocket expenses compared to the insured married clients. Marital status has been considered one of the major drivers for achieving better health outcomes at half the per-person cost of unmarried clients. Recent data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey showed that married beneficiaries use in-network outpatient services at a higher rate than unmarried beneficiaries, lending support to our findings.37 Pertaining to self-reported health, findings from the present study indicated that unwell self-perceived health status is a significant predictor for seeking out-of-network physician care. Indeed, health need factors play a significant role in the pattern and cost of care utilization.38 As early as the 1990s, self-rated health was reported to be an important determinant of physician visit utilization.39 This finding has been supported by previous literature that examined the relationship between self-reported health and healthcare utilization and spending. Fair or poor self-perceived health status was reported to be associated with seeking out-of-network care and it was a significant risk factor for high out-of-pocket expenses and financial burden.40 In addition, a study among insured clients under the HIO in Egypt mentioned self-reported health status as a significant predictor for seeking out-of-network physician visits.8 On the other hand, a study on variation in healthcare spending concluded that similar-price adjusted variations do not seem to be explained by illness or poverty.41

An intriguing result was that clients who perceived the overall quality of care or GP provided-care at NHIF clinics as fair were less likely to be out-of-network users than clients who perceived the overall quality of care or GP provided-care as good. This could be explained by the aspiration of out-of-network users for more quality care. In a study that assessed the quality of services of the SHI in Sudan, although 92% of participants perceived the services provided by the SHI as good, 55% of participants were looking for better services even when there were higher enrollment fees.3 However, a considerable proportion of respondents who perceived the quality of care as good were out-of-network users. In contradiction to this finding, a study showed that participants who rated the overall quality of care at the Egyptian HIO clinics as fair or poor had increased odds to be out-of-network users.8 Nonetheless, leaving the available in-network services by a considerable number of insured NHIF clients and seeking out-of-network care is a direct indicator of client dissatisfaction with the primary care provided at NHIF clinics. The inability of the NHIF to provide quality care that meets customer expectations was noted in a recent critical review of the pros and cons of the NHIF in Sudan.42 It seems that the poor quality of care provided through the NHIF is not only a problem in Sudan but in many other countries of sub-Saharan Africa.43–46

Perception of the referral process from a GP to a specialist was an important factor that affected the use of out-of-network care. NHIF clients who perceived difficulty in obtaining a referral to a specialist were less likely to be out-of-network users than those who described the referral process as easy, likely resorting to in-network care to avoid the complicated process of the referral system. Previous research has shown that the referral system in the SHI in Sudan was perceived as inconvenient by beneficiaries residing in rural areas.3 The waiting time at NHIF clinics was perceived as long by a considerable proportion of out-of-network users. Despite not being a significant determinant for seeking out-of-network care, this finding should not be overlooked. Indeed, decreasing the waiting time will be an avenue for increasing client satisfaction with NHIF services.47,48 NHIF stakeholders should consider effective tools for decreasing the waiting time through the application of “lean six sigma” and other quality improvement projects.49 NHIF policy leaders in Sudan should adapt appropriate and effective strategies to enhance customer loyalty and reduce patients leakage to out-of-network services.50

Implications for Policymakers

  • The results from this study are presented for consideration as a policy document that suggests a need for assessment regarding out-of-network service utilization.
  • The study shows a large portion of out-of-network users, and the results indicate the economic burden of this phenomenon.
  • The study directs the attention of policy leaders toward seeking a means to update or formulate health laws and mandates to subsidy health services and medications, develop different co-payment policies, and expand the availability of medications for network members.

Implications for the Public

  • The study assessed out-of-network utilization patterns with a focus on the magnitude of the problem. The study encourages policymakers to consider the participants’ views when developing reform initiatives to strengthen the national health insurance of Sudan. This could help decrease out-of-network use and consequently avoid catastrophic healthcare costs among the Sudanese population.

Limitation

This study used a cross-sectional design which has the fundamental limitation of temporal ambiguity. Additionally, the current study was based on investigating out-of-network use in the period prior to the interview. Hence, our findings may have been affected by recall bias. Due to a lack of sufficient resources, conflict, and COVID-19 restrictions; the present study was conducted in Al Jazirah state only, which limits the generalization of study results to all NHIF clients in Sudan. Nevertheless, the study provides essential information for policymakers in Sudan that could be used in reform activities of the NHIF in Sudan and other African countries.

Conclusions

A high magnitude of out-of-network physician visit utilization was found among the insured clients of the NHIF under study. The current study provides baseline information that could be useful for strengthening the NHIF in Sudan and other countries in the region. Policymakers and stakeholders in Sudan should work collaboratively to address issues identified in the current study to reduce patient leakage to out-of-network services and to increase the technical efficiency of the NHIF in Sudan.

Acknowledgments

This article is part of a Master’s Degree thesis presented to Alexandria University-High Institute of Public Health, Department of Health Administration and Behavioral Sciences, Division of Health Management, Planning and Policy. We acknowledge the efforts of Basem Farouk Abdel-Aziz in the final revision of the thesis.

Funding

There is no funding to report.

Disclosure

The authors declare no conflicts of interest for this work.

References

1. World Bank Data. Current health expenditure (% of GDP) - Sudan | data; 2021. Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.GD.ZS?locations=SD. Accessed January 17, 2022.

2. Public Health Institute. Health finance policy options for Sudan 2016; 2016. Available from: http://www.phi.edu.sd/IHPbook/HealthFinancePolicy.pdf. Accessed April 16, 2022.

3. Salim AMA, Hamed FHM. Exploring health insurance services in Sudan from the perspectives of insurers. SAGE Open Med. 2018;6:2050312117752298. doi:10.1177/2050312117752298

4. World Health Organization. National health insurance fund. Available from: https://www.who.int/workforcealliance/members_partners/member_list/nhif/en/. Accessed January 16, 2022.

5. Alamin Gadasseed AA. Technical efficiency of public insurance health centers in Gezira State of Sudan. Int J Interdiscip Res. 2012;1(1):108–123.

6. Stein BD, Meili R, Tanielian TL, Klein DJ. Outpatient mental health utilization among commercially insured individuals. Med Care. 2007;45(2):183–186. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000244508.55923.b3

7. Kyanko KA, Curry LA, Busch SH. Out-of-network physicians: how prevalent are involuntary use and cost transparency? Health Serv Res. 2013;48(3):1154–1172. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12007

8. Guirguis WW, Nour El Din MM, Zaghloul AA. Use of out-of-plan services by health insurance beneficiaries in Alexandria; 2003: 173–194. Available from: https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/portal/resource/pt/emr-61725. Accessed October 16, 2021.

9. Kyanko KA, Pong DD, Bahan K, Curry LA. Patient experiences with involuntary out-of-network charges. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(5):1704–1718. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12071

10. Hall MA, Adler L, Ginsburg PB, Trish E. Reducing unfair out-of-network billing — integrated approaches to protecting patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(7):610–612. doi:10.1056/NEJMP1815031

11. Chhabra KR, Dimick JB. “Surprise” out-of-network medical bills. JAMA. 2020;323(9):902. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.0847

12. Schwab P, Sayles H, Bergman D, et al. Utilization of care outside the veterans affairs health care system by US veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2017;69(6):776–782. doi:10.1002/acr.23088

13. Stasko C. Characterizing and reducing avoidable out-of-network utilization in healthcare - RISE:2021. Research Innovation Scholarship Entrepreneurship; 2015. Available from: https://www.northeastern.edu/rise/presentations/characterizing-and-reducing-avoidable-out-of-network-utilization-in-healthcare/. Accessed January 17, 2022.

14. Lin SC, Yan PL, Moloci NM, et al. Out-of-network primary care is associated with higher per beneficiary spending in medicare ACOs. Health Aff. 2020;39(2):310–318. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00181

15. Civic D, Scholes D, Grothaus L, McBride C. Adolescent HMO enrollees’ utilization of out-of-plan services. J Adolesc Heal. 2001;28(6):491–496. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(01)00193-8

16. Barnett ML, Song Z, Rose S, Bitton A, Chernew ME, Landon BE. Insurance transitions and changes in physician and emergency department utilization: an Observational Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(10):1146–1155. doi:10.1007/s11606-017-4072-4

17. Ranson MK. Health insurance in India [10]. Lancet. 2001;358(9292):1555–1556. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06614-4

18. World Health Orgnization. Out-of-pocket payments, user fees and catastrophic expenditure. WHO; 2018. Available from: http://www.who.int/health_financing/topics/financial-protection/out-of-pocket-payments/en/. Accessed February 27, 2021.

19. Zarif-Yeganeh M, Kargar M, Rashidian A, Jafarzadeh Kohneloo A, Gholami K. Out of pocket payment and affordability of medication for geriatric patients in Tehran, Iran. Iran J Public Health. 2019;48(6):1124–1132.

20. Hidayat B. Out-of-pocket payments in the National Health Insurance of Indonesia: a first year review; 2015. Available from: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:oBCb10x1FesJ:www.kpmak-ugm.org/id/assets/public/Policy_Brief_GIZ_SPP_OOP_Spending_in_Indonesian_Health_Insurance.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg&client=firefox-b-d. Accessed December 28, 2021.

21. Nandi S, Schneider H, Dixit P, Prinja S. Hospital utilization and out of pocket expenditure in public and private sectors under the universal government health insurance scheme in Chhattisgarh State, India: lessons for universal health coverage. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):11. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0187904

22. Elhadi YAM, Ahmed A, Ghazy RM, et al. Healthcare utilization with drug acquisition and expenses at the National Health Insurance Fund in Sudan. Healthcare. 2022;10(4):630. doi:10.3390/HEALTHCARE10040630

23. Centeres for Disease Control and Prevention. Epi InfoTM | CDC. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/epiinfo/index.html. Accessed January 17, 2022.

24. Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. KoBoToolbox | data collection tools for challenging environments. Available from: https://www.kobotoolbox.org/. Accessed January 12, 2022.

25. Rose S. International ethical guidelines for epidemiological studies by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170(11):1451–1452. doi:10.1093/AJE/KWP334

26. IBM Corp. IBM SPSS statistics for windows; 2013.

27. Redondo-Sendino Á, Guallar-Castillón P, Banegas JR, Rodríguez-Artalejo F. Gender differences in the utilization of health-care services among the older adult population of Spain. BMC Public Health. 2006;6. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-6-155

28. Williams DR, Wyatt R. Racial bias in health care and health: challenges and opportunities. JAMA. 2015;314(6):555–556. doi:10.1001/JAMA.2015.9260

29. National Academies of Sciences and Engineering. Factors that affect health-care utilization. In: Health-Care Utilization as a Proxy in Disability Determination. Vol. 83. US: National Academies Press; 2018. doi:10.1111/J.1468-0009.2005.00428.X

30. Onah MN, Govender V, Molyneux S. Out-of-pocket payments, health care access and utilisation in South-Eastern Nigeria: a gender perspective. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e93887. doi:10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0093887

31. Gulseth MP. Gender differences in health care expenditures, resource utilization, and quality of care. J Manag Care Pharm. 2008;14(3Suppl). doi:10.18553/JMCP.2008.14.S6-A.2

32. Salganicoff A, Ranji U, Beamesderfer A, Kurani N. Women and health care in the early years of the ACA: key findings from the 2013 Kaiser Women’s Health Survey; 2014. Available from: https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/report/women-and-health-care-in-the-early-years-of-the-aca-key-findings-from-the-2013-kaiser-womens-health-survey/. Accessed January 14, 2022.

33. Saeed YA. The potentiality of private health insurance in Sudan: the Shiekan Insurance Company(Ltd.) experience. Int J Sudan Res. 2012;2(1):57.

34. Riaz B, Sherwani NZF, Inam SHA, et al. Physician gender preference amongst females attending obstetrics/gynecology clinics. Cureus. 2021;13(5). doi:10.7759/CUREUS.15028

35. Cutler D, Skinner JS, Stern AD, Wennberg D. Physician beliefs and patient preferences: a new look at regional variation in health care spending. Am Econ J Econ Policy. 2019;11(1):192–221. doi:10.1257/POL.20150421

36. Elnimeiri MKM, Satti SSM, Ibrahim MKM. Barriers of access and utilization of reproductive health services by adolescents-Khartoum state-Sudan-2020: study protocol. Reprod Health. 2020;17(1):1–5. doi:10.1186/S12978-020-00967-Y/METRICS

37. Pandey KR, Yang F, Cagney KA, Smieliauskas F, Meltzer DO, Ruhnke GW. The impact of marital status on health care utilization among Medicare beneficiaries. Medicine. 2019;98(12):e14871. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000014871

38. Park JM. Equity in the utilization of physician and inpatient hospital services: evidence from Korean health panel survey. Int J Equity Health. 2016;15(1):1–9. doi:10.1186/S12939-016-0452-3/TABLES/3

39. Fylkesnes K. Determinants of health care utilization-visits and referrals. Scand J Soc Med. 1993;21(1):40–50. doi:10.1177/140349489302100107

40. Shen YC, McFeeters J. Out-of-pocket health spending between low- and higher-income populations: who is at risk of having high expenses and high burdens? Med Care. 2006;44(3):200–209. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000199692.78295.7c

41. Newhouse JP, Garber AM, Graham RP, McCoy MA, Mancher M, Kibria A. Variation in Health Care Spending: Target Decision Making, Not Geography. US: National Academies Press; 2013.

42. Babiker MO, Habbani K, Kheir SGM, Awad MM. Pros and cons of national health insurance fund in Sudan: a critical review. J Qual Heal Care Econ. 2021;4(5). doi:10.23880/JQHE-16000241

43. Ngatia MJ. An analysis of the factors affecting customer satisfaction at National Hospital Insurance Fund, Kenya; January 7, 2013. Available from: https://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/6169. Accessed January 17, 2022.

44. Okumu DO. Customer satisfaction among the Nhif members: case of Homa Bay County, Kenya; 2018. Available from: http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/handle/11295/105356. Accessed January 17, 2022.

45. Kahemela L. An examination of the relationship between customer satisfaction and curative quality services supported by the National Health Insurance Fund in Dar Es Salaam; 2017. Available from: http://repository.out.ac.tz/1924/1/DISSERTATION-LUPYANAKAHEMELA%3DFINAL.pdf. Accessed April 16, 2022.

46. Basaza R, Alier PK, Kirabira P, Ogubi D, Lako RLL. Willingness to pay for National Health Insurance Fund among public servants in Juba City, South Sudan: a contingent evaluation. Int J Equity Health. 2017;16(1):1–10. doi:10.1186/S12939-017-0650-7/TABLES/4

47. Abuosi AA, Domfeh KA, Abor JY, Nketiah-Amponsah E. Health insurance and quality of care: comparing perceptions of quality between insured and uninsured patients in Ghana’s hospitals. Int J Equity Health. 2016;15(1):1–11. doi:10.1186/S12939-016-0365-1/TABLES/5

48. Oostrom T, Einav L, Finkelstein A. Outpatient office wait times and quality of care for Medicaid patients. Health Aff. 2017;36(5):826–832. doi:10.1377/HLTHAFF.2016.1478/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/2016.1478FIGEX4.EPS.GZ.JPEG

49. Godley M, Jenkins JB. Decreasing wait times and increasing patient satisfaction: a lean six sigma approach. J Nurs Care Qual. 2019;34(1):61–65. doi:10.1097/NCQ.0000000000000332

50. Aziz SA, Theuri DF. Strategies undertaken by health insurance scheme to enhance Customer loyalty a case study of national hospital insurance fund Ukunda branch office. Eur J Bus Strateg Manag. 2018;3(2):59–80.

Creative Commons License © 2022 The Author(s). This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.