| Literature DB >> 27756368 |
Chengchao Zhou1,2,3, Qian Long4, Jiaying Chen5, Li Xiang6, Qiang Li7, Shenglan Tang4,8, Fei Huang9, Qiang Sun10,11, Henry Lucas12, Shitong Huan13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health expenditure for tuberculosis (TB) care often pushes households into catastrophe and poverty. New Cooperative Medical Scheme (NCMS) aims to protect households from catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and impoverishment in rural China. This article assesses the effect of NCMS on relieving CHE and impoverishment from TB care in rural China.Entities:
Keywords: Catastrophic health expenditure; China; Impoverishment; NCMS; Tuberculosis
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27756368 PMCID: PMC5069881 DOI: 10.1186/s12939-016-0463-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Equity Health ISSN: 1475-9276
Socio-demographic characteristics of the participants
| Characteristic | Patients No. | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Observations | 347 | 100.0 |
| Sites | ||
| Zhenjiang | 39 | 11.2 |
| Yichang | 130 | 37.5 |
| Hanzhong | 178 | 51.3 |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 260 | 74.9 |
| Female | 87 | 25.1 |
| Age (years) | ||
| ≤40 | 57 | 16.4 |
| 41–59 | 148 | 42.7 |
| ≥60 | 142 | 40.9 |
| Type of TB case | ||
| New | 288 | 83.0 |
| Relapse | 59 | 17.0 |
| Education | ||
| None | 66 | 19.0 |
| Primary school | 113 | 32.6 |
| Junior school | 128 | 36.9 |
| Senior school or above | 40 | 11.5 |
| Marital Status | ||
| Married | 284 | 81.8 |
| Single | 16 | 4.6 |
| Bereft of spouse | 47 | 13.5 |
NCMSa impact on incidence of catastrophic expenditure for TB care, China, 2012
| Indicators | Study locations | All | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hanzhong | Yichang | Zhenjiang | ||
| Average capacity to pay (US$) (A1) | 2436.6 (1781.0)b | 3242.8 (2245.4) | 5143.7 (3219.3) | 3042.9 (2268.5) |
| Average food expenditure (US$) (A2) | 958.0 (444.8) | 1157.5 (501.9) | 1906.7 (708.4) | 1139.4 (530.1) |
| Ratios of A2 versus A1 | 1 : 2.54 | 1 : 2.80 | 1 : 2.70 | 1 : 2.67 |
| Total expenditure on TB care (US$c) | 1696.6 (1201.1) | 1257.7 (911.4) | 2226.9 (904.4) | 1591.8 (1074.4) |
| OOPd payments for TB care (US$) | 1094.1 (900.5) | 898.9 (736.5) | 1592.8 (649.5) | 1077.0 (817.4) |
| OOP payments share of total expenditure on TB care (%) | 64.5 | 71.5 | 71.5 | 67.7 |
| Reimbursement from health insurance system (US$) | 589.2 | 304.6 | 619.0 | 485.9 |
| NCMS share of total expenditure on TB care (%) | 34.7 | 24.2 | 27.8 | 30.5 |
| Subsidies from government and other sources (US$) | 13.4 | 54.25 | 15.1 | 28.9 |
| Subsidy share of total expenditure on TB care (%) | 0.8 | 4.3 | 0.7 | 1.8 |
| Households with catastrophic expenditure (%) | ||||
|
| 63.5 | 50.8 | 59.0 | 58.2 |
|
| 51.1 | 39.2 | 51.3 | 46.7 |
|
| 50.6 | 39.2 | 48.7 | 46.1 |
| Difference (%) | ||||
|
| 12.4 | 11.6 | 7.7 | 11.5 |
|
| 0.6 | 0.0 | 2.6 | 0.6 |
|
| 13.0 | 11.6 | 10.3 | 12.1 |
aNCMS means New Cooperative Medical Scheme, the same below;
bMean (SD)
cA currency exchange rate of Chinese RMB 628 Yuan to US$1 00 Yuan (at the end of 2012);
dOOP : out-of-pocket
NCMS impact on intensity of catastrophic expenditure for TB care, China, 2012
| Indicators | Study locations | All | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hanzhong | Yichang | Zhenjiang | ||
| Mean Catastrophic Payment Gap (%) | ||||
|
| 155.2 | 51.7 | 85.4 | 97.4 |
|
| 68.6 | 35.5 | 43.0 | 52.9 |
|
| 65.6 | 31.3 | 42.7 | 49.8 |
| Mean positive gap (%) | ||||
|
| 237.7 | 115.4 | 153.7 | 186.8 |
|
| 161.8 | 105.6 | 91.0 | 135.8 |
|
| 157.3 | 98.2 | 90.5 | 130.0 |
| Difference (%) | ||||
|
| 86.6 | 16.2 | 42.4 | 44.5 |
|
| 3.0 | 4.2 | 0.3 | 3.1 |
|
| 75.9 | 9.8 | 62.7 | 51.0 |
|
| 4.5 | 7.4 | 0.5 | 5.8 |
Headcounts of prepayment poverty and of poverty impoverished by TB OOP expenses, China, 2012
| Characteristic | Hpre (%) | Hoop (%) | Impoverished (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study locations | |||
|
| 26.4 | 44.4 | 18.0 |
|
| 12.3 | 26.2 | 13.1 |
|
| 10.3 | 25.6 | 15.3 |
| Household income quintilesa | |||
|
| 60.6 | 84.4 | 13.8 |
|
| 1.8 | 29.8 | 28.0 |
|
| 0.0 | 12.3 | 12.3 |
|
| 0.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Total | 19.3 | 35.4 | 16.1 |
aQuartile1 (Q1) is the poorest and Quartile 4 (Q4) is the richest
NCMS impact on incidence of impoverishment for TB care, China, 2012
| Indicators | Study locations | All | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hanzhong | Yichang | Zhenjiang | ||
| Poverty line (US$a) | 366.2 | 366.2 | 366.2 | 366.2 |
| Poverty headcounts (%) | ||||
|
| 53.4 | 31.5 | 30.8 | 42.7 |
|
| 44.4 | 26.2 | 25.6 | 35.4 |
|
| 44.4 | 26.2 | 25.6 | 35.4 |
| Difference (%) | ||||
|
| 9.0 | 5.3 | 5.2 | 7.3 |
|
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
aA currency exchange rate of Chinese RMB 628 Yuan to US$1 00 Yuan (at the end of 2012)
NCMS impact on intensity of impoverishment for TB care, China, 2012
| Indicators | Study locations | All | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hanzhong | Yichang | Zhenjiang | ||
| Poverty gap (US$a) | ||||
|
| 45.2 | 14.0 | 8.6 | 26.0 |
|
| 465.6 | 188.8 | 237.4 | 297.7 |
|
| 285.9 | 118.9 | 126.7 | 181.9 |
|
| 280.1 | 106.6 | 120.6 | 174.5 |
|
| ||||
|
| 179.7 | 69.9 | 110.7 | 115.8 |
|
| 5.8 | 12.3 | 6.1 | 7.4 |
|
| 420.4 | 164.8 | 228.8 | 271.7 |
|
| 234.9 | 92.6 | 112.0 | 148.5 |
| Normalized poverty gap (%) | ||||
|
| 12.3 | 3.8 | 2.3 | 7.1 |
|
| 127.1 | 51.6 | 64.8 | 81.3 |
|
| 78.1 | 32.5 | 34.6 | 49.7 |
|
| 76.5 | 29.1 | 32.9 | 47.7 |
|
| ||||
|
| 49.1 | 19.1 | 30.2 | 31.6 |
|
| 1.6 | 3.4 | 1.7 | 2.0 |
|
| 114.8 | 47.7 | 62.5 | 74.2 |
|
| 64.1 | 25.3 | 30.6 | 40.6 |
| Mean positive poverty gap (US$) | ||||
|
| 171.2 | 113.8 | 83.5 | 134.7 |
|
| 871.9 | 599.4 | 770.8 | 697.2 |
|
| 643.9 | 453.8 | 494.9 | 513.8 |
|
| 630.9 | 406.9 | 471.1 | 492.9 |
|
| ||||
|
| 228.0 | 145.5 | 275.9 | 183.3 |
|
| 13.1 | 46.9 | 23.8 | 20.9 |
|
| 700.7 | 485.5 | 687.3 | 562.5 |
|
| 459.6 | 293.0 | 387.6 | 358.2 |
aA currency exchange rate of Chinese RMB 628 Yuan to US$1 00 Yuan (at the end of 2012)