整合城乡居民基本医疗保险制度筹资政策分析——基于公平性视角

目的:从公平性角度对新农合与居民医保制度的筹资政策进行分析。方法:收集2008—2015年新农合和居民医保的筹资数据,新农合数据来自于中国卫生统计年鉴(2009—2012),中国卫生和计划生育统计年鉴(2013—2016)和新型农村合作医疗统计信息手册(2008—2015),居民医保数据主要来自中国劳动统计年鉴(2009—2016)和中国社会保险年鉴(2009—2015)。采用了根据支付能力筹资的方式来衡量城乡居民医保筹资的公平性。选择个人缴费占城乡居民人均可支配收入的比例作为比较医保筹资公平性的具体指标。结果:新农合和城镇居民医保筹资机制类似,个人缴费占人均筹资额比例低于1/4。人均筹资额占农村居民人均纯收入和城镇居民人均可支配收入的比例分别低于2%和5%,而个人缴费占农民人均纯收入和城镇居民人均可支配收入的比例低于1%。居民医保和新农合个人缴费占城乡居民人均可支配(纯)收入比例的差距有所扩大。结论:居民医保和新农合个人缴费占人均可支配收入比例低。农村居民和城镇居民医保采取的平等筹资掩盖了城乡居民在医保筹资方面的不公平性。

Analysis of the financing policy of integrating NCMS and URBMI: Based on the perspective of equity

Objectives:This paper intends to analyze the financing policies of integrating NCMS and URBMI in terms of equity. Methods:Data on the financing of NCMS and URBMI from 2008 to 2015 were collected from the China health statistics yearbook (2009-2012) the China health and Family Planning Statistics yearbook (2013-2016), the National Handbook of NCMS Information (2008-2015), the China human resources and social security statistics yearbook (2009-2016), and the China social security yearbook (2009-2015)."Ability to pay" approach was introduced to measure the inequity in health financing of medical insurance for urban and rural residents. The proportion of individual contributions as to NCMS and URBMI as a percentage of the per capita disposable income was used as an actual indicator to analyze the equity in health financing between rural and urban residents. Results:The URBMI had a financing mechanism that was similar to that used by NCMS in that public finance accounted for more than three quarters of the pooling funds, and the individual contribution accounts for less than? of the per capita contribution amount. The scale of financing for NCMS was less than 5% of the per capita net income of rural residents and less than 2% of the per capita disposable income of urban residents for URBMI. Individual contributions to the NCMS and URBMI funds were less than 1% of their disposable and net incomes. The disparities in health financing between urban and rural residents in China was not improved as expected with the introduction of NCMS and URBMI. Conclusions:The proportion of individual contributions to the URBMI and NCMS funds were small in terms of contributors'' incomes. The equal financing per capita for URBMI and NCMS masks the inequality of urban and rural residents in the financing of medical insurance.