团结的价值:埃塞俄比亚农村社区对社区医疗保险基本原则的理解和接受程度。

IF 2.7 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Mohammed Hussien
{"title":"团结的价值:埃塞俄比亚农村社区对社区医疗保险基本原则的理解和接受程度。","authors":"Mohammed Hussien","doi":"10.1186/s13561-024-00565-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Solidarity is an aspect of human association that gives emphasis to the cohesive social bond that holds a group together and is valued and understood by all members of the group. A lack of understanding of the solidarity principle is one of the main reasons for low population coverage in microhealth insurance schemes. This study aimed to examine the extent to which people value solidarity and the factors that explain the differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out in two districts of northeast Ethiopia among 1232 randomly selected households which have ever been registered in a community-based health insurance scheme. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with household heads using a standardized questionnaire deployed to an electronic data collection platform. Solidarity was measured using three dimensions: income solidarity, risk solidarity, and cost coverage. Principal component analysis was used to construct composite variables, and the reliability of the tools was checked using Cronbach's alpha. A multivariable analysis was performed using the partial proportional odds model to determine the associations between variables. The degree of association was assessed using the odds ratio, and statistical significance was determined at 95% confidence interval.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three-quarters (75%) of the respondents rated risk solidarity as high, while 70% and 63% rated income solidarity and cost coverage as high, respectively. Place of residence (AOR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.68, 2.94), wealth index (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.12), self-rated health status (AOR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.40), trust in insurance schemes (AOR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.30), perceived quality of care (AOR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.33, 2.31) and frequency of outpatient visits (AOR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.30, 3.24) were significant predictors of value for solidarity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The community placed greater value for solidarity, indicating community understanding and acceptance of the core principles of microhealth insurance. Administrators of the insurance scheme, health authorities, and other actors should strive to create a transparent management system and improve access to high-quality health care, which will facilitate community acceptance of the insurance scheme and its guiding principles.</p>","PeriodicalId":46936,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Review","volume":"14 1","pages":"82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11452964/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Value for solidarity: a proxy for community understanding and acceptance of the basic principles of community-based health insurance in rural Ethiopia.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammed Hussien\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13561-024-00565-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Solidarity is an aspect of human association that gives emphasis to the cohesive social bond that holds a group together and is valued and understood by all members of the group. A lack of understanding of the solidarity principle is one of the main reasons for low population coverage in microhealth insurance schemes. This study aimed to examine the extent to which people value solidarity and the factors that explain the differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out in two districts of northeast Ethiopia among 1232 randomly selected households which have ever been registered in a community-based health insurance scheme. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with household heads using a standardized questionnaire deployed to an electronic data collection platform. Solidarity was measured using three dimensions: income solidarity, risk solidarity, and cost coverage. Principal component analysis was used to construct composite variables, and the reliability of the tools was checked using Cronbach's alpha. A multivariable analysis was performed using the partial proportional odds model to determine the associations between variables. The degree of association was assessed using the odds ratio, and statistical significance was determined at 95% confidence interval.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three-quarters (75%) of the respondents rated risk solidarity as high, while 70% and 63% rated income solidarity and cost coverage as high, respectively. Place of residence (AOR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.68, 2.94), wealth index (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.12), self-rated health status (AOR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.40), trust in insurance schemes (AOR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.30), perceived quality of care (AOR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.33, 2.31) and frequency of outpatient visits (AOR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.30, 3.24) were significant predictors of value for solidarity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The community placed greater value for solidarity, indicating community understanding and acceptance of the core principles of microhealth insurance. Administrators of the insurance scheme, health authorities, and other actors should strive to create a transparent management system and improve access to high-quality health care, which will facilitate community acceptance of the insurance scheme and its guiding principles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46936,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Economics Review\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"82\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11452964/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Economics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00565-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-024-00565-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:团结是人类联合的一个方面,它强调社会纽带的凝聚力,这种纽带将一个群体团结在一起,并得到群体所有成员的重视和理解。缺乏对团结原则的理解是小额医疗保险计划人口覆盖率低的主要原因之一。本研究旨在探讨人们对团结的重视程度以及造成差异的因素:在埃塞俄比亚东北部的两个地区,对随机抽取的 1232 户曾经在社区医疗保险计划中登记的家庭进行了社区横断面研究。使用电子数据收集平台上的标准化问卷对户主进行了面对面访谈。团结度从三个方面进行衡量:收入团结度、风险团结度和费用覆盖率。采用主成分分析法构建综合变量,并使用 Cronbach's alpha 检验工具的可靠性。使用偏比例赔率模型进行了多变量分析,以确定变量之间的关联。关联程度使用几率比进行评估,统计显著性以 95% 的置信区间为标准:结果:四分之三(75%)的受访者将风险团结评级为 "高",分别有 70% 和 63% 的受访者将收入团结和成本覆盖评级为 "高"。居住地(AOR = 2.23;95% CI:1.68,2.94)、财富指数(AOR = 1.51;95% CI:1.07,2.12)、自评健康状况(AOR = 1.64;95% CI:1.12,2.40)、对保险计划的信任(AOR = 1.68;95% CI:1.22,2.30)、感知的医疗质量(AOR = 1.75;95% CI:1.33,2.31)和门诊就诊频率(AOR = 2.05;95% CI:1.30,3.24)是团结价值的显著预测因素:结论:社区更重视团结,这表明社区理解并接受了小额医疗保险的核心原则。保险计划的管理者、卫生部门和其他参与者应努力创建一个透明的管理系统,改善高质量医疗服务的可及性,从而促进社区对保险计划及其指导原则的接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Value for solidarity: a proxy for community understanding and acceptance of the basic principles of community-based health insurance in rural Ethiopia.

Background: Solidarity is an aspect of human association that gives emphasis to the cohesive social bond that holds a group together and is valued and understood by all members of the group. A lack of understanding of the solidarity principle is one of the main reasons for low population coverage in microhealth insurance schemes. This study aimed to examine the extent to which people value solidarity and the factors that explain the differences.

Methods: A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out in two districts of northeast Ethiopia among 1232 randomly selected households which have ever been registered in a community-based health insurance scheme. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with household heads using a standardized questionnaire deployed to an electronic data collection platform. Solidarity was measured using three dimensions: income solidarity, risk solidarity, and cost coverage. Principal component analysis was used to construct composite variables, and the reliability of the tools was checked using Cronbach's alpha. A multivariable analysis was performed using the partial proportional odds model to determine the associations between variables. The degree of association was assessed using the odds ratio, and statistical significance was determined at 95% confidence interval.

Results: Three-quarters (75%) of the respondents rated risk solidarity as high, while 70% and 63% rated income solidarity and cost coverage as high, respectively. Place of residence (AOR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.68, 2.94), wealth index (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.12), self-rated health status (AOR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.40), trust in insurance schemes (AOR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.30), perceived quality of care (AOR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.33, 2.31) and frequency of outpatient visits (AOR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.30, 3.24) were significant predictors of value for solidarity.

Conclusions: The community placed greater value for solidarity, indicating community understanding and acceptance of the core principles of microhealth insurance. Administrators of the insurance scheme, health authorities, and other actors should strive to create a transparent management system and improve access to high-quality health care, which will facilitate community acceptance of the insurance scheme and its guiding principles.

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
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.20%
发文量
59
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Economics Review is an international high-quality journal covering all fields of Health Economics. A broad range of theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy with a health economic focus will be considered for publication. Its scope includes macro- and microeconomics of health care financing, health insurance and reimbursement as well as health economic evaluation, health services research and health policy analysis. Further research topics are the individual and institutional aspects of health care management and the growing importance of health care in developing countries.
×
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