Patterns and outcomes of health insurance disputes in Saudi Arabia: an analysis of appealed judicial precedents
- 1College of Public Health, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University
Abstract
Introduction: The expansion of health insurance systems has generated a rise in insurance disputes. Health insurance litigation can have negative consequences spanning beneficiaries, healthcare providers and broader healthcare systems. This dynamic is particularly relevant to Saudi Arabia as its health insurance system is experiencing rapid transformation and growth. Thus, the study analyzed patterns and outcomes related to health insurance disputes in Saudi Arabia.
Methods: The study employed a retrospective analysis of 38 appealed judicial precedents related to health insurance in Saudi Arabia between 2015 and 2024. Data were extracted from published documents by the General Secretariat of the Committees for Resolution of Insurance Disputes and Violations. Extracted data included two dependent variables: final verdict and ratio compensation. The independent variables included variables related to the plaintiff, defendant, insurance policy as well as litigation-related variables. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the associations between the dependent and independent variables were examined using the Fisher’s Exact test.
Results: The largest volume of the judicial precedents originated from the Western region with 16/38 precedents (42.1%). Patients were the primary plaintiffs (55.3%), while insurance companies predominated as defendants (94.7%). The majority of the disputes were related to medical insurance (65.8%), driven primarily by complaints regarding lack of insurance coverage (55.3%). The results indicated that most cases resolved within one year or less. The appeal committee affirmed most verdicts issued by first-instance committees. A total of 26/38 (68.4%) defendants were found liable and 15/38 (39.5%) of plaintiffs were awarded full compensation.
Discussion: The study’s finding reflects a high stability and conformity between committee levels. However, the heavy concentration of cases involving medical coverage denials and patient-led litigation underscores the critical need for clear regulations to minimize insurance conflicts. The findings highlight several implications for policymakers and healthcare practitioners as Saudi Arabia’s health insurance sector continues to expand. Key priorities include enhancing the transparency and systematic publication of judicial precedents, clarifying coverage and exclusion terms in policy contracts, and standardizing the formal documentation of claim denial reasons.
Related
- Glucocorticoid in giant cell arteritis: real-world treatment patterns over time and associated burden in a nationwide hospital-based study within the French health insurance database
- Bridging the gap between health insurance eligibility and uptake: A multistate quantitative analysis of entitlement-based verification patterns under India’s PM-JAY Scheme
- Health Economic Outcomes of Subacromial Balloon Spacer Implantation Across Surgical Care Pathways: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of German Statutory Insurance Claims
- Medical disputes and turnover intention among physicians and medical technicians: evidence from a cross-sectional study in Xuzhou, China.
- Cross-Sectional Study of Multiple Sclerosis Nurse Care in Australia: Patterns of Access, Improved Health Outcomes, and Recommendations: Part 1
BibTeX
@article{alotaibi2026patterns,
title = {{Patterns and outcomes of health insurance disputes in Saudi Arabia: an analysis of appealed judicial precedents}},
author = {Shahad Alotaibi and Ghufran Alhawdar and Sama’a Almubarak},
journal = {Frontiers in Public Health},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fpubh.2026.1908431},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1908431/full},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Patterns and outcomes of health insurance disputes in Saudi Arabia: an analysis of appealed judicial precedents
AU - Shahad Alotaibi
AU - Ghufran Alhawdar
AU - Sama’a Almubarak
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/19
JO - Frontiers in Public Health
DO - 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1908431
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1908431/full
AB - Introduction: The expansion of health insurance systems has generated a rise in insurance disputes. Health insurance litigation can have negative consequences spanning beneficiaries, healthcare providers and broader healthcare systems. This dynamic is particularly relevant to Saudi Arabia as its health insurance system is experiencing rapid transformation and growth. Thus, the study analyzed patterns and outcomes related to health insurance disputes in Saudi Arabia. Methods: The study employed a retrospective analysis of 38 appealed judicial precedents related to health insurance in Saudi Arabia between 2015 and 2024. Data were extracted from published documents by the General Secretariat of the Committees for Resolution of Insurance Disputes and Violations. Extracted data included two dependent variables: final verdict and ratio compensation. The independent variables included variables related to the plaintiff, defendant, insurance policy as well as litigation-related variables. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the associations between the dependent and independent variables were examined using the Fisher’s Exact test. Results: The largest volume of the judicial precedents originated from the Western region with 16/38 precedents (42.1%). Patients were the primary plaintiffs (55.3%), while insurance companies predominated as defendants (94.7%). The majority of the disputes were related to medical insurance (65.8%), driven primarily by complaints regarding lack of insurance coverage (55.3%). The results indicated that most cases resolved within one year or less. The appeal committee affirmed most verdicts issued by first-instance committees. A total of 26/38 (68.4%) defendants were found liable and 15/38 (39.5%) of plaintiffs were awarded full compensation. Discussion: The study’s finding reflects a high stability and conformity between committee levels. However, the heavy concentration of cases involving medical coverage denials and patient-led litigation underscores the critical need for clear regulations to minimize insurance conflicts. The findings highlight several implications for policymakers and healthcare practitioners as Saudi Arabia’s health insurance sector continues to expand. Key priorities include enhancing the transparency and systematic publication of judicial precedents, clarifying coverage and exclusion terms in policy contracts, and standardizing the formal documentation of claim denial reasons.
SN - 2296-2565
ER -