Hospital utilization among urban poor in Indonesia in 2018: is government-run insurance effective?
Government-run insurance
Health insurance
Health policy
Healthcare evaluation
Hospital utilization
Public health
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 01 2023
12 01 2023
Historique:
received:
18
08
2022
accepted:
10
01
2023
entrez:
12
1
2023
pubmed:
13
1
2023
medline:
17
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
An urban poor is a vulnerable group that needs government financing support to access health services. Once they are sick, they will fall deeper into poverty. The study aims to analyze the effectiveness of government-run insurance in hospital utilization in urban poor in Indonesia. The research analyzed the 2018 Indonesian Basic Health Survey data. This cross-sectional survey collected 75,970 participants through stratification and multistage random sampling. Meanwhile, the study employed hospital utilization as an outcome variable and health insurance ownership as an exposure variable. Moreover, the study looked at age, gender, marital status, education, and occupation as control factors. The research employed a binary logistic regression to evaluate the data in the final step. The results show that someone with government-run insurance is 4.261 times more likely than the uninsured to utilize the hospital (95% CI 4.238-4.285). Someone with private-run insurance is 4.866 times more likely than the uninsured to use the hospital (95% CI 4.802-4.931). Moreover, someone with government-run and private-run insurance has 11.974 times more likely than the uninsured to utilize the hospital (95% CI 11.752-12.200). The study concluded that government-run insurance is more effective than the uninsured in improving hospital utilization among the urban poor in Indonesia. Meanwhile, private-run is more effective than government-run and uninsured in improving hospital utilization among the urban poor in Indonesia. Moreover, the most effective is to combine the kind of health insurance ownership (government-run and private-run).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
An urban poor is a vulnerable group that needs government financing support to access health services. Once they are sick, they will fall deeper into poverty. The study aims to analyze the effectiveness of government-run insurance in hospital utilization in urban poor in Indonesia.
METHODS
The research analyzed the 2018 Indonesian Basic Health Survey data. This cross-sectional survey collected 75,970 participants through stratification and multistage random sampling. Meanwhile, the study employed hospital utilization as an outcome variable and health insurance ownership as an exposure variable. Moreover, the study looked at age, gender, marital status, education, and occupation as control factors. The research employed a binary logistic regression to evaluate the data in the final step.
RESULTS
The results show that someone with government-run insurance is 4.261 times more likely than the uninsured to utilize the hospital (95% CI 4.238-4.285). Someone with private-run insurance is 4.866 times more likely than the uninsured to use the hospital (95% CI 4.802-4.931). Moreover, someone with government-run and private-run insurance has 11.974 times more likely than the uninsured to utilize the hospital (95% CI 11.752-12.200).
CONCLUSION
The study concluded that government-run insurance is more effective than the uninsured in improving hospital utilization among the urban poor in Indonesia. Meanwhile, private-run is more effective than government-run and uninsured in improving hospital utilization among the urban poor in Indonesia. Moreover, the most effective is to combine the kind of health insurance ownership (government-run and private-run).
Identifiants
pubmed: 36635640
doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15017-y
pii: 10.1186/s12889-023-15017-y
pmc: PMC9835297
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
92Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Nov 22;21(1):1261
pubmed: 34802452
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Mar;98(12):e14871
pubmed: 30896632
Arch Public Health. 2020 Apr 06;78:20
pubmed: 32280462
J Prim Care Community Health. 2022 Jan-Dec;13:21501319221111112
pubmed: 35818670
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Apr 12;22(1):491
pubmed: 35413914
Iran J Public Health. 2019 Feb;48(2):247-255
pubmed: 31205878
Public Health Rev. 2020 Jan 2;41:1
pubmed: 31908901
CMAJ. 1995 Sep 1;153(5):529-40
pubmed: 7641151
Indian J Community Med. 2022 Apr-Jun;47(2):192-195
pubmed: 36034251
Int J Equity Health. 2018 Sep 12;17(1):138
pubmed: 30208921
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jun 24;21(1):1221
pubmed: 34167514
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Sep 26;16(19):
pubmed: 31561522
China Econ Rev. 2020 Oct;63:101514
pubmed: 35058675
BMC Public Health. 2019 Apr 29;19(1):457
pubmed: 31035994
J Prim Care Community Health. 2022 Jan-Dec;13:21501319211072679
pubmed: 35068256
BMC Public Health. 2021 Aug 11;21(1):1538
pubmed: 34380463
J Health Popul Nutr. 2017 Dec 13;36(1):42
pubmed: 29237493
BMC Public Health. 2014 Dec 22;14:1310
pubmed: 25535401
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Feb 13;20(1):115
pubmed: 32054492
J Hum Cap. 2009 Summer;3(2):144-176
pubmed: 22368727
Asia Pac J Public Health. 2020 Jan;32(1):19-26
pubmed: 31810376
PLoS One. 2022 Apr 12;17(4):e0265843
pubmed: 35413051
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 17;12(11):e0187904
pubmed: 29149181
BMC Geriatr. 2022 Apr 29;22(1):380
pubmed: 35488207