Financial protection in health revisited: Is catastrophic health spending underestimated for service‐ or disease‐specific analysis?

Economists originally developed methods to assess financial catastrophe using total or aggregate out-of-pocket health spending. Aggregate out-of-pocket health spending is financially catastrophic when it exceeds a fixed proportion (i.e., threshold) of a household's total income or expenditure in a given period. However, these methods are now applied to assess financial catastrophe in disease- or service-specific rather than aggregate out-of-pocket health spending without using disease- or service-specific thresholds. This paper argues that not using disease- or service-specific thresholds for such assessments is misleading and underestimates the burden of financial catastrophe, especially among households from poorer backgrounds. It then proposed disease- or service-specific catastrophic payment thresholds, applied them to Nigeria and found that financial catastrophe was underestimated for the five service groups considered. The paper stresses the importance of using disease- or service-specific thresholds and avoiding unadjusted thresholds, which may leave poorer households behind as financially protected.