Toward a More Pro-Poor and Explicit Health Benefit Package in the Kyrgyz Republic : A Critical Review of the Stated Guaranteed Benefit Package and Options for Its Revision
The Kyrgyz Republic has made significant steps in reforming the health system through successive National Health Programs implemented over the last 20 years. One of the major achievements of such reforms were the establishment of a single-payer nat...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Report |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/218671561961103020/Toward-a-More-Pro-Poor-and-Explicit-Health-Benefit-Package-in-the-Kyrgyz-Republic-A-Critical-Review-of-the-Stated-Guaranteed-Benefit-Package-and-Options-for-Its-Revision http://hdl.handle.net/10986/32106 |
| Summary: | The Kyrgyz Republic has made significant
steps in reforming the health system through successive
National Health Programs implemented over the last 20 years.
One of the major achievements of such reforms were the
establishment of a single-payer national health insurance
and a basic benefit package. The State Guaranteed Benefit
Package (SGBP) provides free basic health services at the
primary care level for the whole population, and inpatient
care with nominal co-payments or no fee for certain groups.
Even though the principles of the SGBP contain elements of
international good practice, the SGBP has hardly changed
since it was stablished. At the same time, many changes have
taken place within and outside the health system, exerting
mounting pressure for the SGBP to adapt to the new disease
burden and meet population’s expectations within the context
of budget constraints. The current paper provides a critical
assessment of the Kyrgyz Republic’s basic health benefit
package. It reveals several issues in the actual benefits
delivered to the population as opposed to the generous
promise of the statutory package. Some important limitations
include lack of clarity, persistent funding gap, large
number of fee exemption categories given the resource
constraints and at the same time lack of an effective
mechanism to protect the poor. Most importantly, there is no
systematic arrangement in place to ensure a regular
evidence-based process of the benefit package revision. The
paper proposes several measures that could guide the process
of SGBP revision, considering the Kyrgyz context and
building on international experiences. It is expected that
information from the paper will be useful not only for the
Kyrgyz stakeholders but also other countries in making the
benefit package an effective instrument for achieving
universal health coverage. |
|---|