• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

年轻人的初级保健费用分担的影响:不同收入群体和性别之间的影响不同。

Effects of primary care cost-sharing among young adults: varying impact across income groups and gender.

机构信息

Health Metrics, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, PO Box 463, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Department of Economics, Karlstad University, Universitetsgatan 2, 651 88, Karlstad, Sweden.

出版信息

Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Nov;20(8):1271-1280. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01095-6. Epub 2019 Aug 10.

DOI:10.1007/s10198-019-01095-6
PMID:31401700
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6803576/
Abstract

We estimate the price sensitivity in health care among adolescents and young adults, and assess how it varies across income groups and gender, using a regression discontinuity design. We use the age differential cost-sharing in Swedish primary care as our identification strategy. At the 20th birthday, the copayment increases from €0 to approx. €10 per primary care physician visit and close to this threshold the copayment faced by each person is distributed almost as good as if randomized. The analysis is performed using high-quality health care and economic register data of 73,000 individuals aged 18-22. Our results show that the copayment decreases the average number of visits by 7%. Among women visits are reduced by 9%, for low-income individuals by 11%, and for low-income women by 14%. In conclusion, modest copayments have significant utilization effects, and even in a policy context with relatively low income inequalities, the effect is substantially larger in low-income groups and among women.

摘要

我们使用回归不连续设计来估计青少年和年轻人的医疗保健价格敏感度,并评估其在收入群体和性别之间的差异。我们使用瑞典初级保健中年龄差异共付制作为我们的识别策略。在 20 岁生日时,自付额从€0 增加到每次看初级保健医生约€10,在接近这个门槛时,每个人面临的自付额分配几乎与随机分配一样好。分析使用了 73000 名 18-22 岁的高质量医疗保健和经济登记数据。我们的研究结果表明,自付额使平均就诊次数减少了 7%。女性就诊次数减少了 9%,低收入人群减少了 11%,低收入女性减少了 14%。总之,适度的自付额会产生显著的使用效果,即使在收入不平等相对较低的政策环境下,低收入群体和女性的效果也会大得多。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/288a2435cf9c/10198_2019_1095_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/b8598521c57c/10198_2019_1095_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/3577b391999c/10198_2019_1095_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/6cd9d6060b9d/10198_2019_1095_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/288a2435cf9c/10198_2019_1095_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/b8598521c57c/10198_2019_1095_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/3577b391999c/10198_2019_1095_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/6cd9d6060b9d/10198_2019_1095_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3647/6803576/288a2435cf9c/10198_2019_1095_Fig4_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Effects of primary care cost-sharing among young adults: varying impact across income groups and gender.年轻人的初级保健费用分担的影响:不同收入群体和性别之间的影响不同。
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Nov;20(8):1271-1280. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01095-6. Epub 2019 Aug 10.
2
Copayments and physicians visits: A panel data study of Swedish regions 2003-2012.共付额与看诊:2003 - 2012年瑞典各地区的面板数据研究
Health Policy. 2016 Sep;120(9):1095-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.07.010. Epub 2016 Jul 18.
3
Effects of nurse visit copayment on primary care use: Do low-income households pay the price?护士家访自付费用对初级保健利用的影响:低收入家庭要为此付出代价吗?
J Health Econ. 2024 Mar;94:102866. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2024.102866. Epub 2024 Feb 28.
4
Patient cost-sharing, socioeconomic status, and children's health care utilization.患者自付费用、社会经济地位与儿童医疗保健利用。
J Health Econ. 2018 May;59:109-124. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2018.03.006. Epub 2018 Apr 16.
5
Introducing a GP copayment in Australia: Who would carry the cost burden?在澳大利亚引入全科医生诊疗费用自付制度:谁将承担成本负担?
Health Policy. 2017 May;121(5):543-552. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.03.004. Epub 2017 Mar 16.
6
Knowledge of cost sharing and decisions to seek care.费用分担知识与寻求医疗服务的决策。
Am J Manag Care. 2010 Apr;16(4):298-304.
7
Cost-sharing: patient knowledge and effects on seeking emergency department care.费用分担:患者知识及其对寻求急诊科护理的影响。
Med Care. 2004 Mar;42(3):290-6. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000114917.50457.52.
8
Equitable health services for the young? A decomposition of income-related inequalities in young adults' utilization of health care in Northern Sweden.为年轻人提供公平的医疗服务?瑞典北部年轻人医疗保健利用方面与收入相关的不平等分解
Int J Equity Health. 2017 Jan 18;16(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12939-017-0520-3.
9
The effect of copayments on the utilization of the GP service in Norway.自付额对挪威全科医生服务利用的影响。
Soc Sci Med. 2018 May;205:99-106. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.03.034. Epub 2018 Mar 23.
10
Cost-sharing for emergency care and unfavorable clinical events: findings from the safety and financial ramifications of ED copayments study.急诊护理和不良临床事件的费用分担:急诊共付费用研究的安全性和财务影响结果
Health Serv Res. 2006 Oct;41(5):1801-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00562.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Copayment Adjustments Under Bundled and Two-Tiered Pricing: Welfare Implications for Outpatient Care in Taiwanese Hospitals.捆绑定价和两级定价下的共付额调整:对台湾医院门诊护理的福利影响
Inquiry. 2025 Jan-Dec;62:469580251366876. doi: 10.1177/00469580251366876. Epub 2025 Aug 31.
2
Healthcare resource use and costs of varicella and its complications: A systematic literature review.水痘及其并发症的医疗资源利用和成本:系统文献回顾。
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2023 Dec 15;19(3):2266225. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2023.2266225. Epub 2023 Oct 27.
3
Adolescent and Young Adult Perspectives on Quality and Value in Health Care.

本文引用的文献

1
Patient cost sharing and medical expenditures for the Elderly.老年人的患者费用分担与医疗支出。
J Health Econ. 2016 Jan;45:115-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2015.10.005. Epub 2015 Nov 1.
2
The impact of patient cost-sharing on low-income populations: evidence from Massachusetts.患者成本分担对低收入人群的影响:来自马萨诸塞州的证据。
J Health Econ. 2014 Jan;33:57-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2013.10.008. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
3
How does copayment for health care services affect demand, health and redistribution? A systematic review of the empirical evidence from 1990 to 2011.
青少年和青年对医疗保健质量和价值的看法。
Acad Pediatr. 2023 May-Jun;23(4):782-789. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2022.10.010. Epub 2022 Oct 23.
4
Co-payments and equity in care: enhancing hospitalisation policy for Palestine refugees in Lebanon.自付额与公平性:提升黎巴嫩巴勒斯坦难民的住院政策。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Jan 29;22(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07427-8.
5
Compact for care: how the Affordable Care Act marketplaces fell short for a vulnerable population in Hawaii.《关怀契约:平价医疗法案市场如何未能满足夏威夷弱势人群的需求》。
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Nov;6(11). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007701.
6
The effects of patient cost-sharing on health expenditure and health among older people: Heterogeneity across income groups.患者自付费用对老年人健康支出和健康的影响:收入群体的异质性。
Eur J Health Econ. 2022 Jul;23(5):847-861. doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01399-6. Epub 2021 Nov 15.
7
Degree of regional variation and effects of health insurance-related factors on the utilization of 24 diverse healthcare services - a cross-sectional study.区域差异程度及与健康保险相关因素对 24 种不同医疗保健服务利用的影响——一项横断面研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Nov 27;20(1):1091. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05930-y.
8
Age Structural Transitions and Copayment Policy Effectiveness: Evidence from Taiwan's National Health Insurance System.年龄结构转型与共同支付政策效果:来自台湾全民健康保险制度的证据。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jun 12;17(12):4183. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17124183.
医疗服务的自付费用如何影响需求、健康状况和再分配?对1990年至2011年实证证据的系统综述。
Eur J Health Econ. 2014 Nov;15(8):813-28. doi: 10.1007/s10198-013-0526-8. Epub 2013 Aug 29.
4
Empirical models of demand for out-patient physician services and their relevance to the assessment of patient payment policies: a critical review of the literature.门诊医师服务需求的实证模型及其对患者支付政策评估的相关性:文献综述的批判性评价。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2010 Jun;7(6):2708-25. doi: 10.3390/ijerph7062708. Epub 2010 Jun 23.
5
Varying pharmacy benefits with clinical status: the case of cholesterol-lowering therapy.根据临床状况调整药房福利:以降胆固醇治疗为例。
Am J Manag Care. 2006 Jan;12(1):21-8.
6
The demand for physician services. Evidence from a natural experiment.对医生服务的需求。来自一项自然实验的证据。
J Health Econ. 2003 Nov;22(6):881-913. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6296(03)00047-X.
7
Health insurance and the demand for medical care: evidence from a randomized experiment.健康保险与医疗需求:来自一项随机试验的证据。
Am Econ Rev. 1987 Jun;77(3):251-77.