Graduate School of Public Health Dept. of Public Health Sciences, Institute of Aging, Institute of Health and Environment, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, South Korea.
Div. of Health Care Management and Policy, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, South Korea.
Health Policy. 2021 Jan;125(1):22-26. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.11.003. Epub 2020 Nov 7.
South Korea proactively introduced public long-term care insurance (LTCI) in 2008 when older people were only about one-tenth of the total population. At that time, Korea switched from a tax-based, local-government-operated LTC program targeting low-income older people to the current universal public LTCI run by the National Health Insurance Service, the single public insurer. The LTCI program provides a comprehensive package of home- and institution-based care mainly targeting older people who need assistance in daily living. Over the past decade, the program has continued to expand its population and service coverage: older people in high need have been covered, and an infrastructure for service provision has been established. Future agendas include financial sustainability, care coordination, and the role of local governments. Korea's experiences suggest having an LTCI separate from the NHI has the benefit of potential de-medicalization of LTC, which, in turn, creates challenges for the coordination of health care and LTC. A centralized LTCI system with a single payer has the benefit of bigger risk-pooling, but this may become a barrier to designing integrated community care systems at the local level. There is a tradeoff between population coverage, benefits/cost coverage, and fiscal sustainability.
韩国在 2008 年人口老龄化程度仅为总人口的十分之一时,就积极引入了公共长期护理保险(LTCI)。当时,韩国将原来以税收为基础、由地方政府运营、针对低收入老年人的 LTC 项目,转变为目前由单一公共保险公司——国家健康保险服务(National Health Insurance Service)运营的全民公共 LTCI。该 LTCI 计划提供了全面的居家和机构护理服务,主要针对日常生活需要帮助的老年人。在过去的十年中,该计划不断扩大其覆盖人群和服务范围:高需求的老年人已被覆盖,并且建立了服务提供基础设施。未来的议程包括财务可持续性、护理协调以及地方政府的作用。韩国的经验表明,将 LTCI 与 NHI 分开具有潜在的去医疗化长期护理的好处,这反过来又给医疗保健和长期护理的协调带来了挑战。具有单一付款人的集中 LTCI 系统具有更大的风险池优势,但这可能成为在地方层面设计综合社区护理系统的障碍。在人口覆盖范围、福利/成本覆盖范围和财政可持续性之间存在权衡。