| Literature DB >> 23822579 |
Daniel Boateng1, Dadson Awunyor-Vitor.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health insurance is an important mechanism that succors individuals, states and the nation at large. The purpose of this study was to assess individual's attitude towards health insurance policy and the factors that influence respondents' decision to renew their health insurance policy when it expires.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23822579 PMCID: PMC3716631 DOI: 10.1186/1475-9276-12-50
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Equity Health ISSN: 1475-9276
Background characteristics of respondents
| | | |
| - Female | 183 | 66 |
| - Male | 96 | 34 |
| | | |
| - 18 – 24 | 55 | 19.8 |
| - 25 – 34 | 99 | 35.6 |
| - 35 – 44 | 57 | 20.5 |
| - >44 | 67 | 24.1 |
| | | |
| | | |
| - Single | 97 | 34.8 |
| - Married | 155 | 55.6 |
| - Divorced | 7 | 2.5 |
| - Widowed | 20 | 7.2 |
| | | |
| - None | 21 | 7.9 |
| - Basic | 85 | 30.7 |
| - Secondary | 106 | 38.3 |
| - Tertiary | 65 | 23.5 |
| | | |
| - <GHS 100 | 46 | 20.5 |
| - GHS 100 – 300 | 88 | 39.3 |
| - GHS 301 – 500 | 62 | 27.7 |
| - >GHS 500 | 28 | 12.5 |
| | | |
| | | |
| - Christian | 249 | 89.3 |
| - Moslem | 29 | 10.4 |
| - Traditional | 1 | 0.4 |
| | | |
| - Unemployed | 46 | 16.9 |
| - Farmer | 79 | 29.0 |
| - Civil/public servant | 52 | 19.1 |
| - Trader/businessman | 95 | 34.9 |
| | | |
| - Very good | 54 | 20.0 |
| - Good | 63 | 23.3 |
| - Fair | 91 | 33.7 |
| - Poor | 43 | 15.9 |
| - Very poor | 19 | 7.0 |
Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents and its influence on insurance uptake
| | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |
| - 18 – 24 | 28 (50.9) | 17 (30.9) | 10 (18.2) | | |
| - 25 – 34 | 60 (60.1) | 21 (21.2) | 18 (18.18) | 8.762 | 0.187 |
| - 35 – 44 | 42 (73.7) | 12 (21.1) | 3 (5.3) | | |
| - >44 | 40 (59.7) | 16 (23.9) | 11 (16.4) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - Male | 45 (46.9) | 26 (27.1) | 25 (26.0) | 16.813 | 0.003 |
| - Female | 102 (55.4) | 56 (30.4) | 26 (14.1) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - Single | 56 (57.7) | 22 (22.7) | 19 (19.6) | 13.267 | 0.036 |
| - Married | 95 (61.3) | 42 (27.1) | 18 (11.6) | | |
| - Divorced/widowed | 19 (70.4) | 3 (11.1) | 5 (18.5) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - None | 14 (66.7) | 5 (23.8) | 2 (9.5) | | |
| - Basic | 55 (64.7) | 16 (18.8) | 14 (16.5) | 4.306 | 0.635 |
| - Secondary | 57 (53.5) | 32(30.2) | 17 (16.3) | | |
| - Tertiary | 41 (63.5) | 15 (22.4) | 9 (14.1) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - <GHS 100 | 32 (69.6) | 10 (21.7) | 4 (8.7) | | |
| - GHS 100 – 300 | 46 (52.3) | 23 (26.1) | 19 (21.6) | 6.401 | 0.380 |
| - GHS 301 – 500 | 38 (61.3) | 16 (25.8) | 8 (12.9) | | |
| - >GHS 500 | 19 (67.9) | 5 (17.9) | 4 (14.3) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - Christian | 155 (62.3) | 61 (24.5) | 33 (13.3) | 9.67 | 0.046 |
| - Moslem | 15 (51.7) | 5 (17.2) | 9 (31.0) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - Unemployed | 26 (56.5) | 13 (28.3) | 7 (15.2) | | |
| - Farmer | 41 (51.9) | 38 (48.1) | 20 (25.3) | 3.417 | 0.217 |
| - Civil/public servant | 22 (42.3) | 21 (40.4) | 9 (17.3) | | |
| - Trader/businessman | 63 (66.3) | 21 (22.1) | 11 (11.6) | | |
| | | | | | |
| - Very good/good | 73 (62.4) | 29 (24.8) | 15 (12.8) | | |
| - Fair | 58 (63.7) | 20 (22.0) | 13 (14.3) | 21.931 | 0.002 |
| - Poor/Very poor | 47 (75.8) | 10 (16.1) | 5 (8.1) | ||
Perceptions about insurance scheme
| | | | | | | | |
| - Joining scheme will benefit me | 33.0 | 50.5 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 7.5 | 4.254 | 0.006 |
| - Not need to borrow money to pay hospital care | 70.0 | 23 | 2.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 2.171 | 0.073 |
| - Will save money from paying hospital bills | 60.0 | 21.5 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 8.5 | 3.679 | 0.021 |
| | | | | | | | |
| - Collection of NHIS cards is convenient | 13.0 | 8.0 | 12 | 29 | 38.0 | 3.461 | 0.046 |
| - Scheme office opening hours is convenient | 11 | 22 | 9 | 28 | 30 | 1.785 | 0.121 |
| - Scheme office location is convenient | 7 | 14 | 8 | 33 | 38 | 2.761 | 0.092 |
| | | | | | | | |
| - Premium for the package is too high | 13 | 23 | 5 | 31 | 28 | 5.018 | 0.001 |
| - Registration fee is too high | 21 | 30 | 2 | 42 | 5.0 | 4.872 | 0.012 |
Outcome variable: insured status.
Results of logistic regression analysis of factors influence decision to renew NHIS
| | | | |
| Gender (ref =Male) | 2.5 (1.7, 3.8)** | 2.3 (1.4, 5.2)* | 1.9 (0.9, 6.4) |
| Marital status (ref = single) | 3.1 (1.1, 9.0)* | 2.6 (0.6, 5.3) | 2.0 (0.3, 9.3) |
| Religion (ref = Christianity) | 0.9 (0.1, 3.1) | 0.8 (0.1, 2.5) | 0.8 (0.2, 3.3) |
| Perceived health status | | | |
| - Very good/good (ref) | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| - Fair | 0.9 (0.1, 9.2) | 0.8 (0.2, 10.1) | 0.6 (0.2, 9.9) |
| - Poor/Very poor | 1.7 (1.3, 4.7)* | 1.7 (1.2, 5.1)* | 1.9 (1.1, 7.3)** |
| | | | |
| - Joining scheme will benefit me (ref = agree) | | 0.3 (0.0, 3.7)* | 0.4 (0.1, 4.1) |
| - Will save money from paying hospital bills (ref = agree) | | 0.7 (0.1, 3.5) | 0.6 (0.1, 4.3) |
| - Collection of NHIS cards is convenient (ref = agree) | | 0.3 (0.0, 8.1) | 0.3 (0.1, 8.5)* |
| - Premium for the package is too high (ref = agree) | | 2.5 (1.3, 10.4)** | 2.3 (1.2, 9.5)* |
| - Registration fee is too high (ref = agree) | | 1.9 (0.5, 5.9) | 1.6 (0.1, 7.8) |
| | | | |
| - Quality of drugs is good (ref = agree) | | | 1.1 (0.2, 3.9) |
| - Staff attitude has improved under NHIS (ref = agree) | | | 0.7 (0.1, 6.2) |
| Number of obs | 275 | 274 | 270 |
| LR chi2(4,9,11) | 143.46 | 156.26 | 164.89 |
| Prob > chi2 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| Log likelihood | −344.01797 | −364.1596 | −371.02163 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.48025 | 0.523820 | 0.648281 |
Single = single, widowed, divorced. Outcome = renew NHIS insurance. *p<0.05; **p<0.1.