| Literature DB >> 28931392 |
Hai Gu1, Yun Kou2, Zhiwen Yan3, Yilei Ding2,4, Jusheng Shieh2, Jun Sun2, Nan Cui2, Qianjing Wang2, Hua You5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) puts a heavy disease burden on patients' families, aggravating income-related inequality. In an attempt to reduce the financial risks of rural families incurring CHE, China began the New Rural Cooperative Medical System (NCMS) on a trial basis in 2003 and has raised the reimbursement rates continuously since then. Based on statistical data about rural families in sample area of Jiangsu province, this study measures the incidence of CHE, analyzes socioeconomic inequality related to CHE, and explores the influences of the NCMS on the incidence of CHE.Entities:
Keywords: Catastrophic health care expenditure; Concentration index; Income related inequality; New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme,Reimbursement; Out-of-pocket expenditures
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28931392 PMCID: PMC5607576 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4713-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Flow chart of the sampling procedure
Description of study households in 2009 and 2010 (N = number of households)
| n(%) |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | 2009( | 2010 ( | |
| Having elderly members | |||
| 0–1 | 1069 (75.07) | 1373 (76.45) | 0.82 |
| ≥ 2 | 355 (24.93) | 423 (23.55) | |
| Having children under five | |||
| No | 1320 (92.70) | 1741 (96.94) | 30.43*** |
| Yes | 104 (7.30) | 55 (3.06) | |
| Household scale | |||
| 1-2members | 542 (38.06) | 830 (46.21) | 24.25*** |
| 3–4 members | 678 (47.61) | 711 (39.59) | |
| ≥ 5 members | 204 (14.33) | 255 (14.20) | |
| Gender of household head | |||
| Female | 226 (15.87) | 254 (14.14) | 1.87 |
| Male | 1198 (84.13) | 1542 (85.86) | |
| Age of household head | |||
| Below averagea | 755 (53.02) | 954 (53.12) | 0.003 |
| Over average | 669 (46.98) | 842 (46.88) | |
| Educational level household head | |||
| Illiteracy or Elementary | 978 (68.68) | 1194 (66.48) | 1.75 |
| Junior high school and above | 446 (31.32) | 602 (33.52) | |
| Employment status of Household head | |||
| Unemployment | 320 (22.47) | 467 (26.00) | 5.36* |
| Employment | 1104 (77.53) | 1329 (74.00) | |
| Having chronic disease members | |||
| No | 782 (54.92) | 1020 (56.79) | 1.14 |
| Yes | 642 (45.08) | 776 (43.21) | |
| Inpatient service usageb | |||
| No | 1247 (87.57) | 1636 (91.09) | 10.44*** |
| Yes | 177 (12.43) | 160 (8.91) | |
| Outpatient service usagec | |||
| No | 1307 (91.78) | 1728 (96.21) | 28.70*** |
| Yes | 117 (8.22) | 68 (3.79) | |
| Absence of NCMSd | |||
| No | 1210 (84.97) | 1420 (79.06) | 18.32*** |
| Yes | 214 (15.03) | 376 (20.94) | |
| Absence of commercial health insurancee | |||
| No | 251 (17.63) | 141 (7.85) | 70.79*** |
| Yes | 1173 (82.37) | 1655 (92.15) | |
| Income-based group | |||
| Quintile 1 (poorest) | 284 (19.94) | 359 (19.99) | 0.001 |
| Quintile 2 (poorer) | 285 (20.01) | 359 (19.99) | |
| Quintile 3 (middle) | 285 (20.01) | 359 (19.99) | |
| Quintile 4 (richer) | 285 (20.01) | 359 (19.99) | |
| Quintile 5 (richest) | 285 (20.01) | 360 (20.04) | |
* p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001
a In 2009, the average age of household heads is 56.63 years old; In 2010, the average age of household heads is 58.85 years old
b If anyone of the household members had used inpatient services in the last year
c If anyone of the household members had used inpatient services in the last 2 weeks
d If anyone of the household members did not participate in NCMS
e If all household members were not covered by commercial health insurance
Number and proportion of households that incurred CHE at different level of threshold value
| Threshold value | 2009 | 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Proportion (%) | n | Proportion (%) | |
| 30% | 240 | 16.85 | 211 | 11.75 |
| 40% | 194 | 13.62 | 139 | 7.74 |
| 50% | 151 | 10.60 | 99 | 5.51 |
CHE catastrophic health care expenditure
Number and proportion of households that incurred CHE (Threshold value = 40%)
| Income-based group | 2009 | 2010 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average OOP health expenditure (yuan RMB) | Average household CTP (yuan RMB) | n(%) of households with CHE | Average OOP health expenditure (yuan RMB) | Average household CTP (yuan RMB) | n(%) of households with CHE | |
| Quintile 1 (poorest) | 1432.18 | 4592.76 | 88 (30.99) | 1292.70 | 6039.48 | 57 (15.88) |
| Quintile 2 (poorer) | 1927.26 | 11,390.38 | 34 (11.93) | 1956.88 | 14,510.45 | 34 (9.47) |
| Quintile 3 (middle) | 2393.90 | 20,093.24 | 25 (8.77) | 2721.48 | 25,678.46 | 19 (5.29) |
| Quintile 4 (richer) | 3626.07 | 30,071.82 | 24 (8.42) | 2938.91 | 41,251.86 | 16 (4.46) |
| Quintile 5 (richest) | 6648.21 | 72,925.79 | 23 (8.07) | 4453.47 | 118,844.6 | 13 (3.61) |
| Total | 3206.77 | 27,831.11 | 194 (13.62) | 2673.68 | 41,308.16 | 139 (7.74) |
OOP out-of-pocket, CTP capacity to pay
Concentration index of CHE
| Threshold value | 2009 | 2010 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration index | 95%CI | Concentration index | 95% CI | |
| 30% | −0.321 | (−0.387,-0.255) | −0.362 | (−0.429,-0.294) |
| 40% | −0.298 | (−0.377,-0.221) | −0.323 | (−0.413,-0.233) |
| 50% | −0.284 | (−0.378,-0.189) | −0.318 | (−0.426,-0.210) |
Factors associated with the occurrence of CHE
| Variables | n(%) | ORua (95%CI) | ORmb (95%CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Having elderly members | |||
| 0–1 | 169 (6.92) | 1 | 1 |
| ≥ 2 | 164 (21.08) | 3.59 (2.85,4.53)*** | 1.32 (0.96,1.82) |
| Having children under five | |||
| No | 320 (10.45) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 13 (8.18) | 0.76 (0.43,1.36) | 1.32 (0.64,2.73) |
| Household scale | |||
| 1-2members | 192 (13.99) | 1 | 1 |
| 3–4 members | 111 (7.99) | 0.53 (0.42,0.68)*** | 0.88 (0.65,1.18) |
| ≥ 5 members | 30 (6.54) | 0.43 (0.29,0.64)*** | 0.45 (0.27,0.74)** |
| Gender of household head | |||
| Female | 80 (16.67) | 1 | 1 |
| Male | 253 (9.23) | 0.51 (0.39,0.67)*** | 0.84 (0.60,1.19) |
| Age of household head | |||
| Below average | 82 (4.80) | 1 | 1 |
| Above average | 251 (16.61) | 3.95 (3.05,5.13)*** | 1.52 (1.02,2.25)* |
| Educational level of household head | |||
| Illiteracy or elementary | 278 (12.80) | 1 | 1 |
| Junior high school and above | 55 (5.25) | 0.38 (0.28,0.51)*** | 0.87 (0.61,1.25) |
| Employment status of household head | |||
| Unemployment | 167 (21.22) | 1 | 1 |
| Employment | 166 (6.82) | 0.27 (0.22,0.34)*** | 0.61 (0.45,0.82)** |
| Having chronic disease members | |||
| No | 84 (4.66) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 249 (17.56) | 4.36 (3.36,5.64)*** | 2.17 (1.62,2.92)*** |
| Inpatient service usage | |||
| No | 198 (6.87) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 135 (40.06) | 9.06 (6.98,11.77)*** | 10.48 (7.62,14.41)*** |
| Outpatient service usage | |||
| No | 308 (10.15) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 25 (13.51) | 1.38 (0.89,2.14) | 0.97 (0.57,1.64) |
| Absence of NCMS | |||
| No | 301 (11.44) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 32 (5.42) | 0.44 (0.30,0.65)*** | 0.65 (0.43,1.00)* |
| Absence of commercial health insurance | |||
| No | 19 (4.85) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 314 (11.10) | 2.45 (1.52,3.95)*** | 1.19 (0.68,2.09) |
| Income-based group | |||
| Quintile1 (poorest) | 145 (22.55) | 1 | 1 |
| Quintile 2 (poorer) | 68 (10.56) | 0.41 (0.30,0.55)*** | 0.53 (0.37,0.76)** |
| Quintile 3 (middle) | 44 (6.83) | 0.25 (0.18,0.36)*** | 0.42 (0.27,0.64)*** |
| Quintile 4 (richer) | 40 (6.21) | 0.23 (0.16,0.33)*** | 0.39 (0.25,0.62)*** |
| Quintile 5 (richest) | 36 (5.58) | 0.20 (0.14,0.30)*** | 0.35 (0.22,0.56)*** |
A total of 3220 cases were include in the multivariate logistic regression
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001
a ORu: the odds ratio of univariate logistic regression analysis
b ORm: the odds ratio of multivariate logistic regression analysis
Impact of NCMS adjustment on CHE occurrence
| Variables | n(%) | ORua(95%CI) | ORmb(95%CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| NCMS adjustment | |||
| Before | 181 (14.96) | 1 | 1 |
| After | 120 (8.45) | 0.52 (0.41,0.67)*** | 0.48 (0.36,0.64)*** |
| Having elderly members | |||
| 0–1 | 143 (7.30) | 1 | 1 |
| ≥ 2 | 158 (23.58) | 3.92 (3.06,5.02)*** | 1.39 (0.99,1.96) |
| Having children under five | |||
| No | 294 (11.60) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 7 (7.29) | 0.60 (0.27,1.31) | 0.91 (0.35,2.38) |
| Household scale | |||
| 1-2members | 177 (14.74) | 1 | 1 |
| 3–4 members | 101 (8.99) | 0.57 (0.44,0.74)*** | 0.78 (0.56,1.08) |
| ≥ 5 members | 23 (7.54) | 0.47 (0.30,0.74)** | 0.44 (0.25,0.79)** |
| Gender of household head | |||
| Female | 73 (19.06) | 1 | 1 |
| Male | 228 (10.15) | 0.48 (0.36,0.64)*** | 0.85 (0.58,1.24) |
| Age of household head | |||
| Below average | 66 (4.91) | 1 | 1 |
| Above average | 235 (18.27) | 4.33 (3.26,5.76)*** | 1.58 (1.03,2.41)* |
| Educational level of household head | |||
| Illiteracy or Elementary | 253 (14.00) | 1 | 1 |
| Junior high school and above | 48 (5.83) | 0.38 (0.28,0.52)*** | 0.98 (0.66,1.45) |
| Employment status of household head | |||
| Unemployment | 149 (23.54) | 1 | 1 |
| Employment | 152 (7.61) | 0.27 (0.21,0.34)*** | 0.62 (0.45,0.85)** |
| Having chronic disease members | |||
| No | 72 (4.92) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 229 (19.64) | 4.73 (3.58,6.24)*** | 2.20 (1.60,3.02)*** |
| Inpatient service usage | |||
| No | 178 (7.59) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 123 (43.16) | 9.24 (6.99,12.23)*** | 10.95 (7.77,15.45)*** |
| Outpatient service usage | |||
| No | 280 (11.30) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 21 (13.73) | 1.25 (0.77,2.01) | 0.82 (0.46,1.46) |
| Absence of commercial health insurance | |||
| No | 14 (5.24) | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | 287 (12.15) | 2.50 (1.44,4.34)** | 1.43 (0.74,2.79) |
| Income-based group | |||
| Quintile1 (poorest) | 139 (23.76) | 1 | 1 |
| Quintile 2 (poorer) | 64 (11.76) | 0.43 (0.31,0.59)*** | 0.59 (0.40,0.86)** |
| Quintile 3 (middle) | 37 (7.13) | 0.25 (0.17,0.36)*** | 0.46 (0.29,0.73)** |
| Quintile 4 (richer) | 35 (6.97) | 0.24 (0.16,0.36)*** | 0.41 (0.25,0.67)** |
| Quintile 5 (richest) | 26 (5.42) | 0.18 (0.12,0.28)*** | 0.31 (0.18,0.54)*** |
A total of 2630 were included in the multivariate logistic regression
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001
a ORu: the odds ratio of univariate logistic regression analysis
b ORm: the odds ratio of multivariate logistic regression analysis