School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Room 238, Level 2 Samuels Building, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2020 Dec;18(6):759-766. doi: 10.1007/s40258-020-00597-2.
Equity in health care financing has gained increased attention in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) following the renewed global interest in universal health coverage (UHC), a key component of the sustainable development goals (SDGs). UHC requires that people have access to the health services they need without risking financial hardship. Health financing is central to UHC and many LMICs have initiated reforms to align their health financing systems with the goals of UHC. Evaluation of the equity impact of these reforms has become a growing area of research, especially in countries with large health inequalities where the pressure to move towards UHC is most intense and the need for evidence to inform policy most critical. However, current analytical tools for evaluating equity in health financing conspicuously exclude indicators of quality, an important dimension of UHC. The aim of this paper was to address this critical methodological gap by introducing quality scores into benefit incidence analysis (BIA), one of the key techniques for assessing equity in health financing. BIA measures the extent to which different socioeconomic groups benefit from public spending on health care through their use of health services. The benefit (public subsidy) is captured in monetary terms by multiplying the quantity of a particular health service consumed by the unit cost of that service and subtracting any out-of-pocket costs incurred while using the service. It does not account for variations in the quality of health services in the computation of the public subsidy.
在全球重新关注全民健康覆盖(UHC)之后,医疗保健筹资公平性在中低收入国家(LMICs)得到了更多关注,全民健康覆盖是可持续发展目标(SDGs)的一个关键组成部分。UHC 要求人们能够获得所需的卫生服务,而不会陷入财务困境。卫生筹资是 UHC 的核心,许多 LMIC 已经启动了改革,以使他们的卫生筹资系统与 UHC 的目标保持一致。评估这些改革对公平性的影响已成为一个日益增长的研究领域,特别是在卫生不平等程度较大的国家,这些国家最需要向 UHC 迈进的压力,以及为政策提供信息的证据的需求最为关键。然而,目前评估卫生筹资公平性的分析工具明显排除了质量指标,而质量是 UHC 的一个重要方面。本文的目的是通过将质量评分引入受益情况分析(BIA)来解决这一关键的方法学差距,BIA 是评估卫生筹资公平性的关键技术之一。BIA 通过衡量不同社会经济群体通过使用卫生服务从公共卫生支出中受益的程度来衡量公平性。受益(公共补贴)通过将特定卫生服务的消费数量乘以该服务的单位成本,并从使用该服务时产生的任何自付费用中扣除,以货币形式表示。它没有考虑到卫生服务质量的变化在公共补贴的计算中。