过去十年(2009-2018 年)城市和农村死亡家庭的支付能力和灾难性医疗支出。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Rural and remote health Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-21 DOI:10.22605/RRH8566
Sun Mi Shin
{"title":"过去十年(2009-2018 年)城市和农村死亡家庭的支付能力和灾难性医疗支出。","authors":"Sun Mi Shin","doi":"10.22605/RRH8566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Examining the equity of health care and financial burden in households of deceased individuals in urban and rural areas is crucial for understanding the risks to both national and individual household finances. However, there is a lack of research on catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in these households, specifically in urban and rural contexts. This study aims to identify the ability to pay and equity of CHE for both households of deceased individuals in urban and in rural areas.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study analysed data from the Korea Health Panel for 10 years (2009-2018) and targeted 869 deceased individuals and their households in the Republic of Korea (South Korea). Annual household income and living costs were adjusted based on equivalent household size, and the difference between these values represented the household's ability to pay. Out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure included copayments and uninsured healthcare expenses for emergency room visits, inpatient care, outpatient treatments and prescription medications. CHE was defined as OOP expenditure reaching or exceeding 40% of the household's ability to pay. ANCOVA was performed to control for confounding variables, and the equity of CHE prevalence between urban and rural area was assessed using χ2 analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to urban households, the rural households of deceased individuals had, respectively, fewer members (2.7 v 2.4, p=0.03), a higher rate of presence of a spouse (63.8% v 70.7%, p=0.04) and a higher economic activity rate (12.7% v 20.5%, p=0.002). The mean number of comordities before death was 3.7 in both urban and rural areas, and there was no difference in the experience of using over-the-counter medicines for more than 3 months, emergency room, hospitalisation, and outpatient treatment. In addition, annual household OOP expenditures in urban and rural areas were US$3020.20 and US$2812.20, respectively, showing no statistical difference (p=0.341). This can be evaluated as a positive effect of various policies and practices aimed at alleviating urban-rural health equity. However, the financial characteristics of the household of the deceased in the year of death differed decisively between urban and rural areas. Compared to urban households, the annual income of rural households (US$15,673.80 v US$12,794.80, respectively, p&le;0.002) and the annual ability to pay of rural households (US$14,734.10 v US$12,069.30, respectively, p=0.03) were lower. As a result, the prevalence of CHE was higher in rural areas than in urban areas (68.3% v 77.6%, p=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings of this study highlight the higher risk of CHE in rural areas due to the lower income level and ability to pay of the household of the deceased. It is evident that addressing the issue of CHE requires broader social development and policy efforts rather than individual-level interventions focused solely on improving health access and controlling healthcare costs. The findings of this study contribute to the growing evidence that income plays a crucial role in rural health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21460,"journal":{"name":"Rural and remote health","volume":"24 2","pages":"8566"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ability to pay and catastrophic health expenditure of urban and rural deceased households over the past decade (2009-2018).\",\"authors\":\"Sun Mi Shin\",\"doi\":\"10.22605/RRH8566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Examining the equity of health care and financial burden in households of deceased individuals in urban and rural areas is crucial for understanding the risks to both national and individual household finances. However, there is a lack of research on catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in these households, specifically in urban and rural contexts. This study aims to identify the ability to pay and equity of CHE for both households of deceased individuals in urban and in rural areas.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study analysed data from the Korea Health Panel for 10 years (2009-2018) and targeted 869 deceased individuals and their households in the Republic of Korea (South Korea). Annual household income and living costs were adjusted based on equivalent household size, and the difference between these values represented the household's ability to pay. Out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure included copayments and uninsured healthcare expenses for emergency room visits, inpatient care, outpatient treatments and prescription medications. CHE was defined as OOP expenditure reaching or exceeding 40% of the household's ability to pay. ANCOVA was performed to control for confounding variables, and the equity of CHE prevalence between urban and rural area was assessed using χ2 analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to urban households, the rural households of deceased individuals had, respectively, fewer members (2.7 v 2.4, p=0.03), a higher rate of presence of a spouse (63.8% v 70.7%, p=0.04) and a higher economic activity rate (12.7% v 20.5%, p=0.002). The mean number of comordities before death was 3.7 in both urban and rural areas, and there was no difference in the experience of using over-the-counter medicines for more than 3 months, emergency room, hospitalisation, and outpatient treatment. In addition, annual household OOP expenditures in urban and rural areas were US$3020.20 and US$2812.20, respectively, showing no statistical difference (p=0.341). This can be evaluated as a positive effect of various policies and practices aimed at alleviating urban-rural health equity. However, the financial characteristics of the household of the deceased in the year of death differed decisively between urban and rural areas. Compared to urban households, the annual income of rural households (US$15,673.80 v US$12,794.80, respectively, p&le;0.002) and the annual ability to pay of rural households (US$14,734.10 v US$12,069.30, respectively, p=0.03) were lower. As a result, the prevalence of CHE was higher in rural areas than in urban areas (68.3% v 77.6%, p=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings of this study highlight the higher risk of CHE in rural areas due to the lower income level and ability to pay of the household of the deceased. It is evident that addressing the issue of CHE requires broader social development and policy efforts rather than individual-level interventions focused solely on improving health access and controlling healthcare costs. The findings of this study contribute to the growing evidence that income plays a crucial role in rural health outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rural and remote health\",\"volume\":\"24 2\",\"pages\":\"8566\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rural and remote health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH8566\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural and remote health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH8566","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:研究城市和农村地区已故人员家庭的医疗保健公平性和经济负担对于了解国家和个人家庭财政所面临的风险至关重要。然而,目前缺乏对这些家庭灾难性医疗支出(CHE)的研究,特别是在城市和农村地区。本研究旨在确定城市和农村地区已故个人家庭的支付能力和灾难性医疗支出的公平性:本研究分析了韩国健康面板 10 年(2009-2018 年)的数据,对象是大韩民国(南韩)869 个已故个人及其家庭。家庭年收入和生活费用根据同等家庭规模进行调整,两者之间的差值代表家庭的支付能力。自付(OOP)支出包括急诊室就诊、住院治疗、门诊治疗和处方药的共付额和未投保的医疗费用。自付费用达到或超过家庭支付能力的 40% 即为 "CHE"。采用方差分析控制混杂变量,并使用χ2分析评估城市和农村地区CHE患病率的公平性:与城市家庭相比,农村死者家庭的成员人数较少(2.7 对 2.4,P=0.03),有配偶的比例较高(63.8% 对 70.7%,P=0.04),经济活动率较高(12.7% 对 20.5%,P=0.002)。城市和农村地区死亡前的平均并发症次数均为 3.7 次,使用非处方药超过 3 个月、急诊、住院和门诊治疗的经历没有差异。此外,城市和农村地区家庭每年的自费项目支出分别为 3020.20 美元和 2812.20 美元,无统计学差异(P=0.341)。这可以被评价为旨在缓解城乡卫生公平的各种政策和做法所产生的积极影响。然而,死者家庭在死亡当年的经济特征在城市和农村地区之间存在决定性差异。与城市家庭相比,农村家庭的年收入(分别为 15,673.80 美元对 12,794.80 美元,p≤0.002)和年支付能力(分别为 14,734.10 美元对 12,069.30 美元,p=0.03)较低。因此,农村地区的 CHE 患病率高于城市地区(68.3% 对 77.6%,P=0.003):这项研究的结果突出表明,由于死者家庭的收入水平和支付能力较低,农村地区发生 CHE 的风险较高。显然,要解决 CHE 问题,需要更广泛的社会发展和政策努力,而不是仅侧重于改善医疗途径和控制医疗费用的个人层面的干预措施。越来越多的证据表明,收入在农村健康结果中起着至关重要的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ability to pay and catastrophic health expenditure of urban and rural deceased households over the past decade (2009-2018).

Introduction: Examining the equity of health care and financial burden in households of deceased individuals in urban and rural areas is crucial for understanding the risks to both national and individual household finances. However, there is a lack of research on catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in these households, specifically in urban and rural contexts. This study aims to identify the ability to pay and equity of CHE for both households of deceased individuals in urban and in rural areas.

Methods: This study analysed data from the Korea Health Panel for 10 years (2009-2018) and targeted 869 deceased individuals and their households in the Republic of Korea (South Korea). Annual household income and living costs were adjusted based on equivalent household size, and the difference between these values represented the household's ability to pay. Out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure included copayments and uninsured healthcare expenses for emergency room visits, inpatient care, outpatient treatments and prescription medications. CHE was defined as OOP expenditure reaching or exceeding 40% of the household's ability to pay. ANCOVA was performed to control for confounding variables, and the equity of CHE prevalence between urban and rural area was assessed using χ2 analysis.

Results: Compared to urban households, the rural households of deceased individuals had, respectively, fewer members (2.7 v 2.4, p=0.03), a higher rate of presence of a spouse (63.8% v 70.7%, p=0.04) and a higher economic activity rate (12.7% v 20.5%, p=0.002). The mean number of comordities before death was 3.7 in both urban and rural areas, and there was no difference in the experience of using over-the-counter medicines for more than 3 months, emergency room, hospitalisation, and outpatient treatment. In addition, annual household OOP expenditures in urban and rural areas were US$3020.20 and US$2812.20, respectively, showing no statistical difference (p=0.341). This can be evaluated as a positive effect of various policies and practices aimed at alleviating urban-rural health equity. However, the financial characteristics of the household of the deceased in the year of death differed decisively between urban and rural areas. Compared to urban households, the annual income of rural households (US$15,673.80 v US$12,794.80, respectively, p≤0.002) and the annual ability to pay of rural households (US$14,734.10 v US$12,069.30, respectively, p=0.03) were lower. As a result, the prevalence of CHE was higher in rural areas than in urban areas (68.3% v 77.6%, p=0.003).

Conclusion: The findings of this study highlight the higher risk of CHE in rural areas due to the lower income level and ability to pay of the household of the deceased. It is evident that addressing the issue of CHE requires broader social development and policy efforts rather than individual-level interventions focused solely on improving health access and controlling healthcare costs. The findings of this study contribute to the growing evidence that income plays a crucial role in rural health outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Rural and remote health
Rural and remote health Rural Health-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
9.50%
发文量
145
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Rural and Remote Health is a not-for-profit, online-only, peer-reviewed academic publication. It aims to further rural and remote health education, research and practice. The primary purpose of the Journal is to publish and so provide an international knowledge-base of peer-reviewed material from rural health practitioners (medical, nursing and allied health professionals and health workers), educators, researchers and policy makers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信