| Literature DB >> 30909933 |
Joseph Marfo Boaheng1, Eugenia Amporfu2, Daniel Ansong3, Anthony Kofi Osei-Fosu2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In an effort to increase Ghana's National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) enrollment and retention rates, the NHIS introduced membership renewal and premium payment by mobile phone. The success of such an innovation dependents on many factors including personal and community characteristics of members.Entities:
Keywords: Enrollment; Mobile phone payment system; National Health Insurance Authority; National Health Insurance Scheme; Retention
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30909933 PMCID: PMC6434637 DOI: 10.1186/s12939-019-0946-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Equity Health ISSN: 1475-9276
Descriptive Statistics
| Variable | Category | Frequency | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile Phone usage | Yes | 1159 | 96.99 |
| No | 36 | 3.01 | |
| Age in categories | Young Adult (18–44) | 876 | 73.31 |
| Middle Adult (45–69) | 311 | 26.03 | |
| Older Adult (70+) | 8 | 0.67 | |
| Location | Kumasi metropolis (KMA) | 1038 | 86.86 |
| Atwima Nwabiagya (AN) | 117 | 9.79 | |
| Sekyere central (SC) | 40 | 3.35 | |
| Gender | Female | 619 | 51.80 |
| Male | 576 | 48.20 | |
| Marital Status | Married | 635 | 53.14 |
| Formerly married | 149 | 12.47 | |
| Single | 411 | 34.39 | |
| Education | No education | 40 | 3.35 |
| Basic education | 374 | 31.30 | |
| SHS | 500 | 41.84 | |
| Tertiary education | 281 | 23.51 | |
| Employment | Unemployed | 155 | 12.97 |
| Formally employed | 173 | 14.48 | |
| Informally employed | 867 | 72.55 | |
| Age | Mean (SD) | 36.39 (11.51) | |
| Dependents | Mean (SD) | 1.94 (1.91) |
Logistic Results of Determinants of Paying NHIS Premium by MPPS
| Paying by Mobile Phone | OR | S.E. | Z | P>z | 95% C.I. | |
| Young Age | 2.1436 | 2.2888 | 0.7100 | 0.4750 | 0.2644 | 17.3780 |
| Middle Age | 1.4251 | 1.5304 | 0.3300 | 0.7410 | 0.1737 | 11.6935 |
| KMA | 15.8932*** | 4.9820 | 8.8200 | 0.0000 | 8.5978 | 29.3789 |
| Female | 1.7828 | 0.5345 | 1.9300 | 0.0540 | 0.9906 | 3.2086 |
| Married | 1.3099 | 0.4280 | 0.8300 | 0.4090 | 0.6904 | 2.4851 |
| Income | 3.0665 | 2.1316 | 1.6100 | 0.1070 | 0.7852 | 11.9766 |
| Formerly married | 2.4325 | 1.6846 | 1.2800 | 0.1990 | 0.6260 | 9.4525 |
| Basic Education | 4.1707* | 3.0025 | 1.9800 | 0.0470 | 1.0173 | 17.0995 |
| Senior High School | 4.8877* | 3.7964 | 2.0400 | 0.0410 | 1.0665 | 22.4000 |
| Tertiary Education | 2.4419* | 0.9311 | 2.3400 | 0.0190 | 1.1565 | 5.1559 |
| Informally employee | 4.7950* | 3.1220 | 2.4100 | 0.0160 | 1.3384 | 17.1789 |
| Formally employee | 1.0903 | 0.0885 | 1.0700 | 0.2860 | 0.9300 | 1.2783 |
| Constant | 2.1436 | 2.2888 | 0.7100 | 0.4750 | 0.2644 | 17.3780 |
| No. of Observation = 1040 | ||||||
| R2 = 0.2316 | ||||||
| Test | Categories |
| P-Value | |||
| Overall model evaluation | Likelihood ratio test | -187.23135 | 0.0000 | |||
| Goodness-of-fit test | Hosmer & Lemeshow | 11.95 | 0.1539 | |||
*p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001
Discrimination Test with a Classification Table
| Observed | Predicted | Total | % Correct | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||
| Yes | 981 | 59 | 1040 | |
| No | 2 | 6 | 9 | |
| Overall % Correct | 983 | 65 | 1048 | 94.18 |
Sensitivity = 99.80%, Specificity = 9.23%, Positive predictive value =94.33%, Negative predictive value = 75.00%