The Center for Social Security Studies of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China.
School of Mathematics and Physics, Anhui University of Technology, Ma Anshan, 243002, China.
Int J Equity Health. 2019 Jun 14;18(1):90. doi: 10.1186/s12939-019-0987-1.
The inequity of healthcare utilization in rural China is serious, and the urban-rural segmentation of the medical insurance system intensifies this problem. To guarantee that the rural population enjoys the same medical insurance benefits, China began to establish Urban and Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance (URRBMI) nationwide in 2016. Against this backdrop, this paper aims to compare the healthcare utilization inequity between URRBMI and New Cooperative Medical Schemes (NCMS) and to analyze whether the inequity is reduced under URRBMI in rural China.
Using the data from a national representative survey, the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS), which was conducted in 2015, a binary logistic regression model was applied to analyze the influence of income on healthcare utilization, and the decomposition of the concentration index was adopted to compare the Horizontal inequity index (HI index) of healthcare utilization among the individuals insured by URRBMI and NCMS.
There is no statistically significant difference in healthcare utilization between URRBMI and NCMS, but in outpatient utilization, there are significant differences among different income groups in NCMS; high-income groups utilize more outpatient care. The Horizontal inequity indexes (HI indexes) in outpatient utilization for individuals insured by URRBMI and NCMS are 0.024 and 0.012, respectively, indicating a pro-rich inequity. Meanwhile, the HI indexes in inpatient utilization under the two groups are - 0.043 and - 0.028, respectively, meaning a pro-poor inequity. For both the outpatient and inpatient care, the inequity degree of URRBMI is larger than that of NCMS.
This paper shows that inequity still exists in rural areas after the integration of urban-rural medical insurance schemes, and there is still a certain gap between the actual and the expected goal of URRBMI. Specifically, compared to NCMS, the pro-rich inequity in outpatient care and the pro-poor inequity in inpatient care are more serious in URRBMI. More chronic diseases should be covered and moral hazard should be avoided in URRBMI. For the vulnerable groups, special policies such as reducing the deductible and covering these groups with catastrophic medical insurance could be considered.
中国农村地区的医疗保健利用不平等现象严重,而医疗保险制度的城乡分割加剧了这一问题。为了确保农村人口享有同等的医疗保险福利,中国于 2016 年开始在全国范围内建立城乡居民基本医疗保险(URRBMI)。在此背景下,本文旨在比较 URRBMI 和新型农村合作医疗制度(NCMS)之间的医疗保健利用不平等,并分析在农村地区 URRBMI 是否降低了这种不平等。
利用 2015 年进行的全国代表性调查——中国健康与退休纵向研究(CHARLS)的数据,应用二元逻辑回归模型分析收入对医疗保健利用的影响,并采用集中指数分解法比较 URRBMI 和 NCMS 参保个体的医疗保健利用水平不公平指数(HI 指数)。
URRBMI 和 NCMS 在医疗保健利用方面没有统计学上的显著差异,但在门诊利用方面,NCMS 在不同收入组之间存在显著差异;高收入组利用更多的门诊医疗服务。URRBMI 和 NCMS 参保个体的门诊利用水平不公平指数(HI 指数)分别为 0.024 和 0.012,表明存在富裕程度不公平。同时,两组参保个体的住院利用水平不公平指数(HI 指数)分别为-0.043 和-0.028,表明存在贫困程度不公平。无论是门诊还是住院治疗,URRBMI 的不公平程度都大于 NCMS。
本文表明,城乡医疗保险制度整合后,农村地区仍存在不平等现象,URRBMI 的实际效果与预期目标仍存在一定差距。具体而言,与 NCMS 相比,URRBMI 在门诊治疗方面存在更严重的富裕程度不公平,在住院治疗方面存在更严重的贫困程度不公平。URRBMI 应更多地覆盖慢性病,并避免道德风险。对于弱势群体,可以考虑出台特殊政策,如降低免赔额,为这些群体提供灾难性医疗保险。