Lokuge Buddhima, Denniss Richard, Faunce Thomas A
Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia.
Med J Aust. 2005 Mar 21;182(6):290-3. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb06704.x.
Since 1996, an increasing proportion of federal government expenditure has been directed into Australia's healthcare system via private health insurance (PHI) subsidies, in preference to Medicare and the direct funding of public health services. A central rationale for this policy shift is to increase the use of private hospital services and thereby reduce pressure on public inpatient facilities. However, the impact of this reform process on regional Australia has not been addressed. An analysis of previously unpublished Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows that regional Australians have substantially lower levels of private health fund membership. As a result, regional areas appear to be receiving substantially less federal government health funding, compared with cities, than if these funds were allocated on a per-capita basis. We postulate that the lower level of membership in regional areas is mainly due to the limited availability of private inpatient facilities, making PHI less attractive to rural Australians. We conclude that PHI as a vehicle for mainstream federal health financing has potential structural failures that disadvantage regional Australians.
自1996年以来,联邦政府支出中越来越大的比例通过私人健康保险(PHI)补贴流向澳大利亚的医疗保健系统,而不是流向医疗保险和公共卫生服务的直接资金投入。这一政策转变的一个核心理由是增加私立医院服务的使用,从而减轻公立住院设施的压力。然而,这一改革进程对澳大利亚偏远地区的影响尚未得到探讨。对澳大利亚统计局此前未公布的数据进行的分析表明,澳大利亚偏远地区的私人健康保险参保率要低得多。结果,与城市地区相比,如果按人均分配这些资金,偏远地区获得的联邦政府医疗资金似乎要少得多。我们推测,偏远地区参保率较低主要是因为私立住院设施的可及性有限,使得私人健康保险对澳大利亚农村居民的吸引力降低。我们得出结论,作为联邦主流医疗融资手段的私人健康保险存在潜在的结构性缺陷,使澳大利亚偏远地区居民处于不利地位。