| Literature DB >> 25095780 |
Vu Duy Kien1, Hoang Van Minh2, Kim Bao Giang2, Lars Weinehall3, Nawi Ng3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A health system that provides equitable health care is a principal goal in many countries. Measuring horizontal inequity (HI) in health care utilization is important to develop appropriate and equitable public policies, especially policies related to non-communicable diseases (NCDs).Entities:
Keywords: decomposition; healthcare utilization; horizontal equity; non-communicable diseases; urban Vietnam
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25095780 PMCID: PMC4122820 DOI: 10.3402/gha.v7.24919
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Glob Health Action ISSN: 1654-9880 Impact factor: 2.640
Variables included in this study
| Categories | Variables |
|---|---|
| Healthcare utilization | The probability of any public healthcare utilization |
| Healthcare need | Sex–Age, self-reported of non-communicable diseases |
| Control variables | Wealth index, education, occupation, health insurance |
Proportion and concentration indexes of public healthcare utilization during the past 12 months and the distributions of their determinants for slum and non-slum areas in Hanoi
| Slum areas | Non-slum areas | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Variables | Proportion (in decimal) | Concentration index | Proportion (in decimal) | Concentration index |
| Public healthcare utilization | ||||
| Communal health center | 0.020 | 0.044 | 0.017 | −0.157 |
| District hospitals | 0.035 | −0.063 | 0.038 | −0.020 |
| Provincial hospitals | 0.053 | −0.112 | 0.073 | −0.049 |
| National hospitals | 0.118 | 0.114 | 0.148 | −0.101 |
| Any public healthcare utilization | 0.213 | 0.034 | 0.267 | −0.074 |
| Age–sex | ||||
| Males aged 15–29 | 0.137 | 0.016 | 0.090 | 0.121 |
| Males aged 30–44 | 0.124 | 0.053 | 0.133 | 0.079 |
| Males aged 45–59 | 0.109 | −0.016 | 0.110 | −0.014 |
| Males aged 60+ | 0.094 | 0.069 | 0.137 | −0.115 |
| Females aged 15–29 | 0.135 | 0.055 | 0.125 | 0.068 |
| Females aged 30–44 | 0.148 | −0.041 | 0.135 | 0.061 |
| Females aged 45–59 | 0.137 | −0.083 | 0.118 | −0.016 |
| Females aged 60+ | 0.117 | −0.029 | 0.152 | −0.126 |
| Wealth index | ||||
| Wealth quintile: 1 – lowest 20% | 0.167 | −0.833 | 0.161 | −0.839 |
| Wealth quintile: 2 – lower 20% | 0.180 | −0.486 | 0.214 | −0.465 |
| Wealth quintile: 3 – middle 20% | 0.209 | −0.098 | 0.197 | −0.054 |
| Wealth quintile: 4 – higher 20% | 0.212 | 0.323 | 0.230 | 0.373 |
| Wealth quintile: 5 – highest 20% | 0.233 | 0.767 | 0.199 | 0.801 |
| Education | ||||
| Education: primary school or less | 0.187 | −0.381 | 0.060 | −0.270 |
| Education: secondary school | 0.281 | −0.151 | 0.181 | −0.119 |
| Education: high school | 0.282 | 0.099 | 0.271 | 0.008 |
| Education: college/university or higher | 0.250 | 0.345 | 0.487 | 0.073 |
| Work status | ||||
| Work status: professionals, technicians, or social services | 0.139 | 0.300 | 0.238 | 0.139 |
| Work status: worker, farmer, or crafts worker | 0.178 | −0.029 | 0.124 | −0.061 |
| Work status: self-employed | 0.289 | −0.149 | 0.187 | −0.039 |
| Not in workforce: unemployed | 0.053 | −0.315 | 0.025 | −0.253 |
| Not in workforce: retired | 0.204 | 0.073 | 0.310 | −0.083 |
| Not in workforce: other, such as not decided to work or student/pupil | 0.138 | 0.060 | 0.116 | 0.120 |
| Non-communicable diseases | 0.079 | −0.077 | 0.116 | −0.169 |
| Health insurance | 0.658 | 0.109 | 0.826 | 0.013 |
Probability of determinants on any public healthcare utilization during the past 12 months in slum and non-slum areas in Hanoi (marginal effect using the probit model)
| Variables | Slum areas | Non-slum areas |
|---|---|---|
| Age–sex | ||
| Males aged 15–29 | ref. | ref. |
| Males aged 30–44 | −0.022 | 0.034 |
| Males aged 45–59 | 0.101 | 0.190 |
| Males aged 60+ | 0.272 | 0.363 |
| Females aged 15–29 | −0.066 | −0.023 |
| Females aged 30–44 | 0.032 | 0.065 |
| Females aged 45–59 | 0.234 | 0.362 |
| Females aged 60+ | 0.212 | 0.464 |
| Wealth index | ||
| Wealth quintile: 1 – lowest 20% | ref. | ref. |
| Wealth quintile: 2 – lower 20% | 0.039 | 0.168 |
| Wealth quintile: 3 – middle 20% | −0.008 | −0.003 |
| Wealth quintile: 4 – higher 20% | 0.048 | 0.016 |
| Wealth quintile: 5 – highest 20% | 0.031 | −0.003 |
| Education | ||
| Education: primary school or less | ref. | ref. |
| Education: secondary school | −0.005 | −0.082 |
| Education: high school | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Education: college/university or higher | −0.021 | −0.008 |
| Work status | ||
| Work status: professionals, technicians, or social services | ref. | ref. |
| Work status: worker, farmer, or craft worker | 0.030 | 0.028 |
| Work status: self-employed | 0.050 | 0.033 |
| Not in workforce: unemployed | 0.090 | 0.066 |
| Not in workforce: retired | 0.093 | 0.052 |
| Not in workforce: other, such as not decided to work or student/pupil | −0.008 | −0.035 |
| Non-communicable diseases | ||
| No | ref. | ref. |
| Yes | 0.268 | 0.229 |
| Health insurance coverage | ||
| No | ref. | ref. |
| Yes | 0.113 | 0.115 |
Dependent variable for the probit model is a dichotomous indicator of whether a person has had any health care during the past 12 months or not, and indicates significance level as follows:
p≤0.001,
0.001
0.01
Distributions of actual, need predicted, and need standardized healthcare utilization in slum areas in Hanoi
| Probability of any public health care utilization | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Need standardized | |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Probit with controls | With controls | Without controls | |||||
|
| |||||||
| Quintiles | Actual | Need predicted | Different=predicted−actual | Probit | OLS | Probit | OLS |
| Wealth quintile: 1 – lowest 20% | 0.174 | 0.201 | −0.027 | 0.172 | 0.172 | 0.176 | 0.176 |
| Wealth quintile: 2 – lower 20% | 0.223 | 0.213 | 0.011 | 0.210 | 0.210 | 0.207 | 0.207 |
| Wealth quintile: 3 – middle 20% | 0.203 | 0.196 | 0.009 | 0.207 | 0.206 | 0.205 | 0.205 |
| Wealth quintile: 4 – higher 20% | 0.255 | 0.196 | 0.060 | 0.259 | 0.259 | 0.259 | 0.259 |
| Wealth quintile: 5 – highest 20% | 0.208 | 0.190 | 0.018 | 0.217 | 0.217 | 0.217 | 0.217 |
| Mean | 0.213 | 0.199 | 0.014 | 0.213 | 0.213 | 0.213 | 0.213 |
| Concentration index/ | 0.034 | −0.019 | 0.052 | 0.050 | 0.050 | 0.050 | |
| Standard error | 0.028 | 0.010 | 0.025 | 0.025 | 0.025 | 0.025 | |
| t-ratio | 1.214 | −1.889 | 2.033 | 1.998 | 1.995 | 2.011 | |
OLS=Ordinary Least Square model; probit=probit model; HIWV=horizontal inequity index using the indirect standardization approach.
Distributions of actual, need predicted, and need standardized healthcare utilization in non-slum areas in Hanoi
| Probability of any public health care utilization | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Need standardized | |||||||
|
| |||||||
| Probit with controls | With controls | Without controls | |||||
|
| |||||||
| Quintiles | Actual | Need predicted | Different=predicted−actual | Probit | OLS | Probit | OLS |
| Wealth quintile: 1 – lowest 20% | 0.335 | 0.313 | 0.022 | 0.280 | 0.281 | 0.273 | 0.273 |
| Wealth quintile: 2 – lower 20% | 0.271 | 0.250 | 0.021 | 0.278 | 0.278 | 0.278 | 0.279 |
| Wealth quintile: 3 – middle 20% | 0.222 | 0.246 | −0.024 | 0.234 | 0.234 | 0.236 | 0.236 |
| Wealth quintile: 4 – higher 20% | 0.262 | 0.239 | 0.022 | 0.280 | 0.280 | 0.281 | 0.282 |
| Wealth quintile: 5 – highest 20% | 0.243 | 0.237 | 0.006 | 0.263 | 0.262 | 0.265 | 0.265 |
| Mean | 0.267 | 0.257 | 0.010 | 0.267 | 0.267 | 0.267 | 0.267 |
| Concentration index/ | −0.075 | −0.066 | −0.011 | −0.013 | −0.004 | −0.004 | |
| Standard error | 0.022 | 0.010 | 0.019 | 0.019 | 0.019 | 0.019 | |
| t-ratio | −3.364 | −6.456 | −0.580 | −0.667 | −0.222 | −0.234 | |
OLS=Ordinary Least Squares; HIWV=horizontal inequity index using the indirect standardization approach.
Decomposition of concentration index for public health care utilization in slum areas in Hanoi
| Contributions to concentration index for any healthcare utilization | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| OLS | Probit partial effects | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Absolute | Percentage | Standardized percentage | Absolute | Percentage | Standardized percentage | |
| Need factors | ||||||
| Age–sex groups | −0.010 | −29.05 | −34.02 | −0.015 | −43.47 | −39.86 |
| Non-communicable diseases | −0.008 | −24.43 | −28.61 | −0.008 | −22.78 | −20.89 |
| Subtotal | −0.018 | −53.48 | −62.63 | −0.023 | −66.25 | −60.75 |
| Non-need factors | ||||||
| Wealth index | 0.026 | 76.81 | 41.88 | 0.026 | 76.76 | 36.88 |
| Health insurance coverage | 0.036 | 106.59 | 58.12 | 0.038 | 113.17 | 54.38 |
| Education | −0.003 | −8.85 | −10.36 | −0.003 | −8.55 | −7.84 |
| Work status | −0.007 | −20.03 | −23.46 | −0.012 | −34.25 | −31.41 |
| Subtotal | 0.052 | 154.52 | 84.25 | 0.050 | 147.13 | 70.70 |
| Residual | −0.001 | −3.03 | −3.55 | 0.006 | 18.18 | 8.74 |
| Total | 0.033 | 0.033 | ||||
| Horizontal inequity index (HIWV) | 0.052 | 0.056 | ||||
OLS=Ordinary Least Square model; probit=probit model; HIWV=horizontal inequity index using the indirect standardization approach.