目的了解农村医疗保障项目对灾难性医疗费的影响。方法入户调查。结果河北、陕西和内蒙古3个中西部省份的3330户家庭、11252人接受调查,其中90.8%的个人参合(家庭为91.2%);8.0%的个人没有医保(家庭为7.8%);1337个贫困人中,7.6%的人通过医疗救助参合。补偿前,总医疗费所致灾难性医疗费的发病率和强度分别为14.3%、2.8%;非住院费比住院费发生较多的灾难性医疗费;补偿后,新农合对灾难性医疗费的保护率、强度分别为9.9%、16.9%;新农合减少住院费所致灾难性医疗费比非住院费多;医疗救助避免1%的家庭发生灾难性医疗费。新农合和灾难性医疗费没有关联。结论农村医疗保障项目对灾难性医疗费的保护作用有限。 OBJECTIVE To examine the impact of New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme(NRCMS)and Medical Financial Aid(MFA)on catastrophic health payment(CHP). METHODS A household survey was conducted. RESULTS 90.8% individuals participated in NRCMS and 8.0% had no insurance. Among the 1,337 poor individuals,7.6% had their premium paid by MFA. Non-admission fee incurred a larger CHP than admission fee. For total fees,the incidence and intensity of CHP was 14.3% and 2.8%. NRCMS reduced those parameters by 9.9% and 16.9%. NRCMS was more effective in decreasing both the incidence and intensity of CHP for hospital admission than those for non-hospital care. FMA prevented 1% households from CHP. NRCMS were not associated with CHP. CONCLUSION The current medical care insurance schemes hardly protect against CHP.

Zhongxibu san sheng nongcun yiliao baozhang xiangmu dui zainan yiliaofei de yingxiang 中西部3省农村医疗保障项目对灾难性医疗费的影响 [Influence of rural health security schemes on catastrophic health payment among three provinces located in Chinese central-western rural areas]

BROMBAL, Daniele;
2013-01-01

Abstract

目的了解农村医疗保障项目对灾难性医疗费的影响。方法入户调查。结果河北、陕西和内蒙古3个中西部省份的3330户家庭、11252人接受调查,其中90.8%的个人参合(家庭为91.2%);8.0%的个人没有医保(家庭为7.8%);1337个贫困人中,7.6%的人通过医疗救助参合。补偿前,总医疗费所致灾难性医疗费的发病率和强度分别为14.3%、2.8%;非住院费比住院费发生较多的灾难性医疗费;补偿后,新农合对灾难性医疗费的保护率、强度分别为9.9%、16.9%;新农合减少住院费所致灾难性医疗费比非住院费多;医疗救助避免1%的家庭发生灾难性医疗费。新农合和灾难性医疗费没有关联。结论农村医疗保障项目对灾难性医疗费的保护作用有限。 OBJECTIVE To examine the impact of New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme(NRCMS)and Medical Financial Aid(MFA)on catastrophic health payment(CHP). METHODS A household survey was conducted. RESULTS 90.8% individuals participated in NRCMS and 8.0% had no insurance. Among the 1,337 poor individuals,7.6% had their premium paid by MFA. Non-admission fee incurred a larger CHP than admission fee. For total fees,the incidence and intensity of CHP was 14.3% and 2.8%. NRCMS reduced those parameters by 9.9% and 16.9%. NRCMS was more effective in decreasing both the incidence and intensity of CHP for hospital admission than those for non-hospital care. FMA prevented 1% households from CHP. NRCMS were not associated with CHP. CONCLUSION The current medical care insurance schemes hardly protect against CHP.
2013
2013 (3)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Brombal 2013_NRCMS_CHN_Abstract 2.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Abstract
Licenza: Licenza non definita
Dimensione 206.99 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
206.99 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in ARCA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10278/41046
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact