甘肃省农村卫生筹资公平性分析研究

目的:研究甘肃省农村各项卫生筹资渠道的公平程度。方法:利用累进性分析方法评价卫生筹资的公平性。运用比例法和指数法,分析甘肃省农村各种卫生筹资渠道的累进性,反映卫生支出在不同社会经济群体间的分布和公平程度。结果:(1)通过税收进行卫生筹资具有良好的公平性;(2)当前新农合的筹资方式缺乏公平性;(3)直接现金卫生支出不具备公平性。结论:卫生筹资应以政府主导,加强利用税收进行卫生筹资,改变新农合的筹资方式,降低直接现金卫生支出在卫生筹资中的比重。     

农村家庭灾难性卫生支出案例研究

“农村家庭灾难性卫生支出案例研究”是《卫生领域公平性系列研究》的组成部分。运用公平性测量方法，对甘肃和黑龙江两省农村地区案例研究，测量与分析两省农村地区家庭灾难性卫生支出发生率和影响程度，及其在不同经济水平家庭的分布。并讨论灾难性卫生支出的合理标准，发生灾难性卫生支出的主要影响因素，以及如何降低灾难性卫生支出发生率，提高卫生筹资公平程度。     

某市新型农村合作医疗卫生服务利用公平性分析

目的探讨新型农村合作医疗的卫生筹资公平性及其影响因素,为相关部门完善新农合制度提供科学依据。方法采用WHO在（（2000年世界卫生报告》中所介绍的卫生筹资贡献率（HFC）、卫生筹资公平性指数（FFC）、灾难性卫生支出（CEH）来评价。结果HFC为17．3％,FFC为0．30;安宁市农民家庭新农合筹资公平性低于国内平均水平;影响家庭灾难性卫生支出的因素主要是家庭年收入。结论新型农村合作医疗制度应适当向低收入人群倾斜,以提高其筹资公平性。     

某省卫生筹资系统公平性案例研究

目的:测量和分析某省卫生筹资系统公平性.方法:根据卫生筹资公平系统框架,利用某省第四次家庭卫生服务调查数据从卫生资金筹集公平、资金分配公平和筹资风险保护3个维度简要分析该省卫生筹资公平性状况.结果:某省综合卫生筹资Kakwani指数为0.0345,卫生资金筹集具有累进性,但存在公共筹资比重不高、不同人群医疗保障水平存在差异的问题;政府补助分布向富裕人群倾斜,低收入人群受益较少;与筹资和受益公平状况相对应,该省18.32%的家庭发生灾难性卫生支出,3.67%的人因为就医花费陷入贫困.结论:某省在筹资风险保护方面需要进一步改善.     

陕西省农村地区卫生筹资累进性研究

目的:探究陕西省农村地区不同筹资方式的累进性.方法:利用微观和宏观数据,采用集中曲线、Kakwani指数等,比较不同筹资方式的累进性.结果:税收公平性较好,现金卫生支出公平性较差,新农合传统的固定数额的筹资方式不具有公平性,总卫生筹资略微累退.结论:改变新农合传统筹资方式,提高补偿水平,减少低收入人群现金卫生支出,改变累退筹资现状,逐步改善卫生筹资公平性.     

山西省新型农村合作医疗家庭筹资公平性分析

目的：探索山西省新型农村合作医疗试点县卫生筹资公平性以及灾难性卫生支出家庭对筹资公平性的影响。方法：采用WHO《2000年世界卫生报告》中所介绍的卫生服务筹资公平性方法。结果：山西省新型农村合作医疗试点县卫生筹资贡献率HFC0为26．91％，卫生筹资公平性指数FFC为0．6828；剔除灾难性卫生支出家庭后．榆社、娄烦县的HFC均有所下降。筹资公平性分别提高了7．32％和7．40％。结论：山西省试点县农民家庭合作医疗筹资公平性相当于国内平均水平；灾难性卫生支出家庭是影响新型农村合作医疗筹资公平性的因素。     

卫生筹资公平性评价方法浅析

国际现有的卫生筹资公平性评价方法主要有:家庭卫生筹资贡献率的计算、对卫生筹资渠道累进性的分析、个人现金卫生支出致贫影响分析等。文章通过对这几种方法的分析进而讨论我国卫生筹资公平性研究方法的现状。     

广西壮族自治区农村卫生筹资公平性分析研究

目的:分析广西壮族自治区农村各种卫生筹资渠道的公平程度。方法:利用比例法、累进性分析等方法分析2000～2008年广西农村各种卫生筹资渠道的公平性。结果:2000～2008年广西农村通过税收进行筹资的公平性呈上升趋势,2008年略显累进性(kakwani指数为0.0076)。直接现金卫生支出的kakwani指数在-0.1上下波动,筹资的公平性较差。结论:提高政府卫生投入力度,加强利用税收进行卫生筹资,拓宽社会卫生筹资,降低个人卫生支出的比例,从而提高卫生筹资的公平性。     

新疆生产建设兵团卫生筹资累进性分析

目的:对新疆生产建设兵团全省、城市和农场卫生筹资公平性进行分析,测量各种卫生筹资渠道的累进性,反映卫生支出在不同社会经济群体之间的分布与公平程度。方法:利用兵团2004年第二次卫生服务调查数据,运用比例法和指数法对兵团家庭卫生筹资累进性进行分析。结果:从绝对分布看,兵团各种卫生支出的集中指数均为正,富裕家庭支付的多,贫困家庭支付的少;从相对分布看,税收支出的Kakwani指数为负,筹资分布表现为累退,社会医疗保险支出、商业健康保险支出和现金卫生支出的Kakwani指数均为正,筹资分布呈现出累进的特点。从兵团城市和农场各种卫生支出的绝对分布看,均是富裕家庭支付的多,贫困家庭支付的少;从相对分布看,城市和农场卫生筹资特点不完全相同。结论:新疆兵团卫生筹资的绝对分布是公平的;相对分布除社会医疗保险和个人现金卫生支出筹资机制表现出公平特点外,税收筹资表现出不公平性特点,商业健康保险卫生筹资是否公平不能判断,因为分城市和农场其表现出来的特征不同;4种卫生筹资机制公平性相比较,社会医疗保险支出的公平性最好,税收支出公平性最差。     

大理州巍山县农村家庭发生灾难性卫生支出的影响因素研究

[目的]探索影响大理州巍山县农村居民家庭发生灾难性支出的主要因素。[方法]计算WHO在2000年世界卫生报告中所介绍的卫生筹资贡献率(HFC),按照该值是否大于等于40%的标准将随机抽取的家庭分为两类,采用logistic回归分析影响家庭发生灾难性支出的主要因素。[结果]大理州巍山县农村发生灾难性卫生支出的家庭比例为11.19%,影响家庭灾难性卫生支出的因素有:家庭年收入、家庭中是否有人住院。[结论]家庭年收入、家庭中是否有人住院等因素会影响大理巍山县农村家庭灾难性卫生支出的发生。     

安徽省农村居民灾难性卫生支出状况分析

目的：研究安徽省农村居民家庭灾难性卫生支出概况。方法：分析2009年安徽省样本地区新农合补偿前后居民家庭灾难性卫生支出发生率、灾难性卫生支出差距以及灾难性卫生支出集中指数的变化情况。结果：新农合补偿以后,样本地区灾难性卫生支出发生率、平均差距和相对差距均有所下降,而且灾难性卫生支出差距集中指数进一步向0靠近,提示平均差距在补偿后则进一步趋向平衡。结论：安徽省农村家庭现金卫生支出负担相对较重;灾难性卫生支出有从贫困家庭扩大到相对富裕家庭的趋势;新农合补偿降低了灾难性卫生支出的发生,但从整体上看作用有限。     

城市低保家庭灾难性卫生支出现状及影响因素实证分析

目的:了解城市贫困家庭灾难性卫生支出现状,分析其影响因素,并提出针对性的措施。方法:采用自行设计的问卷,采用系统抽样的方式对样本市的1 100户获得国家最低生活保障的家庭进行了调查。数据分析方法包括统计描述、logistic回归模型等。结果:调查家庭灾难性卫生支出发生率为59.15%;影响调查地区低保人群灾难性卫生支出发生的主要因素包括家庭成员最高文化程度、家庭成员患慢性病和住院服务利用状况、医疗救助知晓和利用情况、家庭经济状况。结论:调查低保家庭的灾难性卫生支出发生率极高;慢性病对调查地区低保家庭灾难性卫生支出的影响较大。因此,应进一步完善医疗救助制度、强化低保人群的慢性病社区管理、改善家庭经济状况以降低低保人群灾难性卫生支出。     

农村居民疾病经济风险与灾难性卫生支出关联性研究

综合运用疾病经济风险度和灾难性卫生支出分析农村居民疾病经济风险,结果表明,总体疾病家庭经济风险度较低,但是仍有9.49%的家庭处于高度疾病风险之中;贫困人群疾病经济风险度是非贫困人群的6.63倍;家庭疾病经济风险度与灾难性卫生支出发生率之间有相关关系,贫困人群的灾难性家庭卫生支出发生率大于非贫困人群。对此,提出了建立重大疾病补助基金、实行累进缴费制度、优化调整统筹补偿方案等建议。     

Reflections on and alternatives to WHO's fairness of financial contribution index

In its 2000 World Health Report (WHR), the World Health Organization argues that a key dimension of a health system's performance is the fairness of its financing system. This paper provides a critical assessment of the index of fairness of financial contribution (FFC) proposed in the WHR. It shows that the index cannot discriminate between health financing systems that are regressive and those that are progressive, and cannot discriminate between horizontal inequity on the one hand, and progressivity and regressivity on the other. The paper compares the WHO index to an alternative and more illuminating approach developed in the income redistribution literature in the early 1990s and used in the late 1990s to study the fairness of various OECD countries' health financing systems. It ends with an illustrative empirical comparison of the two approaches using data on out-of-pocket payments for health services in Vietnam for two years - 1993 and 1998. This analysis is of some interest in its own right, given the large share of health spending from out-of-pocket payments in Vietnam, and the changes in fees and drug prices over the 1990s.     

Determining factors of catastrophic health spending in Bogota,Colombia

This study tests whether the low-income population in Bogota not insured under the General Social Security Health System is able to economically handle unexpected health problems or not. It used data from the Health Services Use and Expenditure Study conducted in Colombia in 2001, for which each household recorded its monthly out-of-pocket health expenditure during the year and the household income was measured as the sum of each member’s contribution to the household. Payment capacity or available income and catastrophic health spending were based on the latest methodology proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2005. A probit model was adjusted to determine the factors that significantly influence the likelihood of a household having catastrophic health spending. The percentage of households with catastrophic health spending in Bogota was 4.9%; incidence was higher in low-income households where none of the members were affiliated to social security, where there had been an in-patient event, and where the heads of household were over 60 years of age. There is no statistical evidence for rejecting the hypothesis under study, which states that low-income households that have no health insurance are more likely to have catastrophic health spending than higher-income households with health insurance.     

Measuring financial protection in health in the United States

One rationale for health insurance coverage is to provide financial protection against catastrophic health expenditures. This article defines a lack of financial protection as household spending on health care when: (1) out-of-pocket (OOP) health expenditures exceed 10% of family income; (2) out-of-pocket expenditures exceed an absolute level of 2000 US dollars per family member on an annual basis; and (3) combined out-of-pocket and prepaid health expenditures exceed 40% of family income. The article explores how the likelihood of households in the United States surpassing these thresholds varies by income level, extent of insurance coverage, and the number of chronic conditions. The results show clearly that there is a lack of financial protection for health services for a wide segment of the US population-particularly so for poor families and those with multiple chronic conditions. The results are placed in an international context. Similar studies in other countries would allow for more in-depth comparisons of financial protection than are currently possible.     

重特大疾病医疗救助因病致贫对象界定的理论与方法探析

重特大疾病医疗救助对象界定关乎医疗救助的公平性和精准性,然而我国重特大疾病因病致贫对象界定仍缺乏理论和方法依据。重特大疾病相对费用理论考虑了家庭支付能力,同时灾难性和致贫性卫生支出测量方法不仅反映了家庭疾病经济负担和贫困状态,而且能够反映救助对象的因病致贫广度和深度。因此,基于重特大疾病相对费用理论及其测量方法的因病致贫对象界定思路能够支持我国重特大疾病因病致贫对象的界定。     

Geographic Variation in Household and Catastrophic Health Spending in India: Assessing the Relative Importance of Villages,Districts, and States, 2011‐2012

Policy Points:

• Per‐capita household health spending was higher in economically developed states and was associated with ability to pay, but catastrophic health spending (CHS) was equally high in both poorer and more developed states in India.
• Based on multilevel modeling, we found that the largest geographic variation in health spending and CHS was at the state and village levels, reflecting wide inequality in the accessibility to and cost of health care at these levels.
• Contextual factors at macro and micro political units are important to reduce health spending and CHS in India.

Context

In India, health care is a local good, and households are the major source of financing it. Earlier studies have examined diverse determinants of health care spending, but no attempt has been made to understand the geographical variation in household and catastrophic health spending. We used multilevel modeling to assess the relative importance of villages, districts, and states to health spending in India.

Methods

We used data on the health expenditures of 101,576 households collected in the consumption expenditure schedule (68th round) carried out by the National Sample Survey in 2011‐2012. We examined 4 dependent variables: per‐capita health spending (PHS), per‐capita institutional health spending (PIHS), per‐capita noninstitutional health spending (PNHS), and catastrophic health spending (CHS). CHS was defined as household health spending exceeding 40% of its capacity to pay. We used multilevel linear regression and logistic models to decompose the variation in each outcome by state, region, district, village, and household levels.

Findings

The average PHS was 1,331 Indian rupees (INR), which varied by state‐level economic development. About one‐fourth of Indian households incurred CHS, which was equally high in both the economically developed and poorer states. After controlling for household level factors, 77.1% of the total variation in PHS was attributable to households, 10.1% to states, 9.5% to villages, 2.6% to districts, and 0.7% to regions. The pattern in variance partitioning was similar for PNHS. The largest interstate variation was found for CHS (15.9%), while the opposite was true for PIHS (3.2%).

Conclusions

We observed substantial variations in household health spending at the state and village levels compared with India's districts and regions. The large variation in CHS attributable to states indicates interstate inequality in the accessibility to and cost of health care. Our findings suggest that contextual factors at the macro and micro political units are important to reduce India's household health spending and CHS.     

2011—2015年平凉市卫生资源配置及公平性研究

目的 了解2011—2015年平凉市卫生资源配置状况及其公平性。方法 运用描述性研究、洛伦兹曲线和基尼系数进行公平性分析。结果 2011—2015年，平凉市卫生人力资源和床位数呈逐年上升趋势，卫生人员数从2011年的11 519人增长到2015年的14 986人；床位数从7 853张增长到12 379张；在2011年，卫生人员的人口洛伦兹曲线基本靠近对角线，而卫生技术人、执业(助理)医师、注册护士和床位数的曲线相对偏离对角线，2015年和2011年相比公平性变化不大；各类卫生人员和床位数的地理洛伦兹曲线偏离对角线，到2015年，曲线变化不大；基尼系数按人口分布分析，除注册护士外，其他指标的基尼系数值均在正常状态以内，按照地理分布分析，各个指标在每年均处于不公平状态。结论 平凉市卫生人员和床位数呈逐年上升的趋势，但配置不合理，公平性较差，人口公平性优于地理公平性。