本文關(guān)鍵詞： 保險(xiǎn) 健康 醫(yī)療補(bǔ)助 受益歸屬分析 公平性　出處：《中國全科醫(yī)學(xué)》2016年22期 　論文類型：期刊論文

【摘要】：目的了解不同醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)(醫(yī)保)覆蓋人群獲得政府醫(yī)療補(bǔ)助的受益歸屬及公平性。方法于2014年6月,在"2014年基層衛(wèi)生綜合改革重點(diǎn)聯(lián)系點(diǎn)家庭健康詢問調(diào)查"人群中選取參加了城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保(n=5 773)、城鎮(zhèn)居民醫(yī)保(n=6 581)、新型農(nóng)村合作醫(yī)療(新農(nóng)合,n=9 495)的居民21 849例。按經(jīng)濟(jì)水平從低到高分為最貧困組(n=4 370)、次貧困組(n=4 370)、中間組(n=4 370)、次富裕組(n=4 370)及最富裕組(n=4 369),采用集中指數(shù)、Kakwani指數(shù)評(píng)價(jià)政府醫(yī)療補(bǔ)助的絕對(duì)公平程度和相對(duì)公平程度。結(jié)果從最貧困組到最富裕組,城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保居民的門診補(bǔ)助占比分別為7.1%、12.4%、16.5%、22.7%、41.3%,住院補(bǔ)助占比分別為7.9%、12.7%、16.7%、24.3%、38.5%;城鎮(zhèn)居民醫(yī)保居民的門診補(bǔ)助占比分別為26.9%、18.5%、15.1%、12.8%、26.8%,住院補(bǔ)助占比分別為16.8%、14.4%、23.6%、18.5%、26.7%;新農(nóng)合居民的門診補(bǔ)助占比分別為13.5%、14.5%、19.0%、25.1%、28.0%,住院補(bǔ)助占比分別為16.0%、16.2%、14.4%、26.5%、27.0%。城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保、城鎮(zhèn)居民醫(yī)保及新農(nóng)合居民門診補(bǔ)助的集中指數(shù)分別為0.260、0.076、-0.021,住院補(bǔ)助的集中指數(shù)分別為0.098、0.221、0.175。城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保、城鎮(zhèn)居民醫(yī)保及新農(nóng)合居民門診補(bǔ)助的Kakwani指數(shù)分別為-0.060、-0.265、-0.331,住院補(bǔ)助的Kakwani指數(shù)分別為-0.222、-0.120、-0.135。結(jié)論不同醫(yī)保覆蓋人群的政府醫(yī)療補(bǔ)助均有利于低收入人群,新醫(yī)改制度下居民獲得基層門診政府補(bǔ)助更加公平可及。
[Abstract]:Objective to understand the benefit ownership and fairness of people with different coverage of medical insurance (Medicare) in receiving Medicaid from the government. Methods in June 2014. In 2014, the survey of family health in the key contact points of primary health comprehensive reform was carried out among the people who participated in the medical insurance of urban workers and staff, and the urban residents' medical insurance was 6581). 21,849 residents of the new rural cooperative medical system (NCMS 9 495). According to the economic level from low to high as the poorest group of 4370). The second poverty group was 4370, the middle group was 43 70, the second rich group was nong 43 70) and the richest group was 4 369%. The concentration index was adopted. The Kakwani index evaluates the absolute and relative fairness of government Medicaid. Results from the poorest group to the richest group, the proportion of outpatient benefit for urban workers' medical insurance residents was 7.1% respectively. 12.4 the proportion of the allowance for hospitalization was 7.9 and 12.7and 16.7and 24.38.5respectively. The proportion of outpatient assistance for residents of urban health insurance is 26.9and 18.50.15.1and 12.80.The proportion of in-patient allowance is 14.4percent, respectively. 23.6and 18.5and 26.7; The proportion of outpatient assistance to NCMS residents was 13.50.14.5and 19.00.25.0% and 28.0% respectively, and the proportion of in-patient allowance was 16.0% or 16.2% respectively. The concentration index of medical insurance for urban workers, medical insurance for urban residents and the outpatient assistance for new NCMS residents are 0.260, 0.076 and 0.021, respectively. The concentration index of hospitalization allowance was 0.0980.221 / 0.175 respectively. The Kakwani index of medical insurance for urban residents and the outpatient assistance for NCMS residents were -0.060 ~ -0.265 and 0.331, respectively. The Kakwani index of hospitalization benefit is -0.222 ~ -0.120 ~ (-1) ~ 0.135 respectively. Conclusion the government Medicaid of different medical insurance coverage is beneficial to low-income people. Under the new medical reform system, it is more equitable for residents to receive government subsidies at the grass-roots outpatient clinics.
【作者單位】： 石河子大學(xué)醫(yī)學(xué)院預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)系;國家衛(wèi)生計(jì)生委衛(wèi)生發(fā)展研究中心;
【分類號(hào)】：R197.1;F842.684
【正文快照】： 作者單位:832002新疆維吾爾自治區(qū)石河子市,石河子大學(xué)醫(yī)學(xué)院預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué)系(周楊,唐景霞,陳英);國家衛(wèi)生計(jì)生委衛(wèi)生發(fā)展研究中心(秦江梅,張麗芳,張艷春)Benefit Incidence and Equity of Government Medical Subsidy Received by People Under Different Health InsuranceZHOU Ya

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 王昌民;滕衛(wèi);;醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)制度改革對(duì)優(yōu)撫醫(yī)院的影響及對(duì)策[A];《中國民政醫(yī)學(xué)雜志》組稿暨醫(yī)院學(xué)術(shù)會(huì)議論文匯編[C];2000年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 記者 王曉亮;我市城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保政策調(diào)整[N];海東時(shí)報(bào);2014年

2 記者 王佳麗;太原城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保住院費(fèi)結(jié)算有新規(guī)[N];山西經(jīng)濟(jì)日?qǐng)?bào);2010年

3 記者 鄭有勝;營口城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保享受門診慢性病醫(yī)療補(bǔ)助[N];遼寧日?qǐng)?bào);2008年

4 早報(bào)首席評(píng)論員 魯寧;取消公費(fèi)醫(yī)療為“新醫(yī)改”增動(dòng)力[N];東方早報(bào);2012年

5 北京師范大學(xué) 顧昕;促進(jìn)“小病進(jìn)社區(qū)”需要醫(yī)保杠桿[N];中國勞動(dòng)保障報(bào);2008年

6 記者 劉啟紅;萍鄉(xiāng)推進(jìn)醫(yī)改惠民[N];江西日?qǐng)?bào);2011年

7 記者 宜秀萍;全省城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保和醫(yī)改工作會(huì)閉幕[N];甘肅日?qǐng)?bào);2000年

8 記者王健生;重慶基本醫(yī)療保障制度實(shí)現(xiàn)全覆蓋[N];中國改革報(bào);2010年

9 記者 錦秀　霜紅;我市城鎮(zhèn)職工醫(yī)保有重大調(diào)整[N];大同日?qǐng)?bào);2009年

10 本報(bào)記者 江馬鐸;讓群眾享受更多實(shí)惠[N];潮州日?qǐng)?bào);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 范文君;不同基本醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)的老年居民衛(wèi)生服務(wù)利用研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2014年

2 王麗珍;城鎮(zhèn)職工基本醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)基金的保值增值問題研究[D];貴州財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：1462080