Wenqi Fu , Jufang Shi , Chaojie Liu , Wanqing Chen , Guoxiang Liu , Jie He
{"title":"Health insurance and inequalities in catastrophic health spending in cancer patients. A cross-sectional study in China","authors":"Wenqi Fu , Jufang Shi , Chaojie Liu , Wanqing Chen , Guoxiang Liu , Jie He","doi":"10.1016/j.gaceta.2024.102397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To determine the role of social health insurance programs in reducing inequality in the incidence and intensity of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) of cancer patients in China.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A convenient sample of 2534 cancer patients treated in nine hospitals in 2015 and 2016 were followed up through face-to-face interviews in March-December 2018. The incidence and intensity (mean positive overshoot) of CHE (≥ 40% household consumption) were calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>About 72% of cancer patients experienced CHE events after insurance compensation, with the catastrophic mean positive overshoot amounting to 28.27% (SD: 15.83%) of the household consumption. Overall, social insurance contributed to a small percentage of drop in CHE events. Income-related inequality in CHE persisted before and after insurance compensation. Richer patients benefit more than poorer ones.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Cancer treatment is associated with high incidence of CHE events in China. The alleviating effect of social health insurance on CHE events is limited.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12494,"journal":{"name":"Gaceta Sanitaria","volume":"38 ","pages":"Article 102397"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S021391112400044X/pdfft?md5=ea69f9f4e1fa7648ab7dd9b6879e1259&pid=1-s2.0-S021391112400044X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaceta Sanitaria","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S021391112400044X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To determine the role of social health insurance programs in reducing inequality in the incidence and intensity of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) of cancer patients in China.
Method
A convenient sample of 2534 cancer patients treated in nine hospitals in 2015 and 2016 were followed up through face-to-face interviews in March-December 2018. The incidence and intensity (mean positive overshoot) of CHE (≥ 40% household consumption) were calculated.
Results
About 72% of cancer patients experienced CHE events after insurance compensation, with the catastrophic mean positive overshoot amounting to 28.27% (SD: 15.83%) of the household consumption. Overall, social insurance contributed to a small percentage of drop in CHE events. Income-related inequality in CHE persisted before and after insurance compensation. Richer patients benefit more than poorer ones.
Conclusions
Cancer treatment is associated with high incidence of CHE events in China. The alleviating effect of social health insurance on CHE events is limited.
期刊介绍:
Gaceta Sanitaria (Health Gazette) is an international journal that accepts articles in Spanish and in English. It is the official scientific journal of the Sociedad Española de Salud Publica y Administración Sanitaria (Spanish Society of Public Health and Health Administration) (SESPAS).
The Journal publishes 6 issues per year on different areas of Public Health and Health Administration, including:
-Applied epidemiology-
Health prevention and promotion-
Environmental health-
International health-
Management and assessment of policies and services-
Health technology assessments-
Health economics.
The editorial process is regulated by a peer review system. It publishes original works, reviews, opinion articles, field and methodology notes, protocols, letters to the editor, editorials, and debates.