{"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}
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.
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.