Health Policy and Management (보건행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management (한국보건행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Econometric Analysis of the Difference in Medical Use among Income Groups in Korea: 2015

한국의 소득수준 간 의료이용 차이의 계량적 분석: 2015

  • Oh, Youngho (Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs)
  • Received : 2018.07.31
  • Accepted : 2018.08.21
  • Published : 2018.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study is to estimate empirically whether there is a difference in medical use among income groups, and if so, how much. This study applies econometric model to the most recent year of Korean Medical Panel, 2015. The model consists of outpatient service and inpatient service models. Methods: The probit model is applied to the model which indicate whether or not the medical care has been used. Two step estimation method using maximum likelihood estimation is applied to the models of outpatient visits, hospital days, and outpatient and inpatient out-of-pocket cost models, with disconnected selection problems. Results: The results show that there was the inequality favorable to the low income group in medical care use. However, after controlling basic medical needs, there were no inequities among income groups in the outpatient visit model and the model of probability of inpatient service use. However, there were inequities favorable to the upper income groups in the models of probability of outpatient service use and outpatient out-of-pocket cost and the models of the number of length of stay and inpatient out-of-pocket cost. In particular, it shows clearly how the difference in outpatient service and inpatient service utilizations by income groups when basic medical needs are controlled. Conclusion: This means that the income contributes significantly to the degree of inequality in outpatient and inpatient care services. Therefore, the existence of medical care use difference under the same medical needs among income groups is a problem in terms of equity of medical care use, so great efforts should be made to establish policies to improve equity among income groups.

Keywords

Table 1. Equity model to estimate diferences in medical use by income level

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. General characteristics of subjects of analysis by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Estimates of probit model for outpatient medical use

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0003.png 이미지

Table 5. Estimation of outpatient visits model using the two-stage method maximum likelihood estimation

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0004.png 이미지

Table 4. Probability of outpatient service use by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0005.png 이미지

Table 7. Estimation of outpatient out-of-pocket cost model using the two-stage method maximum likelihood estimation

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0006.png 이미지

Table 6. Visits of outpatient by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0007.png 이미지

Table 8. Outpatient out-of-pocket cost by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0008.png 이미지

Table 9. Estimates of probit model for inpatient medical use

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0009.png 이미지

Table 10. Probability of inpatient service use by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0010.png 이미지

Table 11. Estimation of length of stay model using the two-stage method maximum likelihood estimation

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0011.png 이미지

Table 12. Length of stay by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0012.png 이미지

Table 13. Estimation of inpatient out-of-pocket cost model using the two-stage method maximum likelihood estimation

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0013.png 이미지

Table 14. Inpatient out-of-pocket cost by income quintile

BGHJBH_2018_v28n4_339_t0014.png 이미지

References

  1. Van Doorslaer E, Wagstaff A, van der Burg H, Christiansen T, De Graeve D, Duchesne I, et al. Equity in the delivery of health care in Europe and the US. J Health Econ 2000;19(5):553-583. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(00)00050-3
  2. Van Doorslaer E, Koolman X, Jones AM. Explaining income-related inequalities in doctor utilisation in Europe. Health Econ 2004;13(7):629-647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.919.
  3. Lu JF, Leung GM, Kwon S, Tin KY, van Doorslaer E, O'Donnell O. Horizontal equity in health care utilization evidence from three high-income Asian economies. Soc Sci Med 2007;64(1):199-212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.08.033.
  4. Carr-Hill R, Chalmers-Dixon P. The public health observatory handbook of health inequality measurement. Oxford: Association of Public Health Observatories; 2005.
  5. Macinko J, Lima-Costa MF. Horizontal equity in health care utilization in Brazil, 1998-2008. Int J Equity Health 2012;11:33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-11-33.
  6. Phiri J, Ataguba JE. Inequalities in public health care delivery in Zambia. Int J Equity Health 2014;13:24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-13-24.
  7. Yang W. China's new cooperative medical scheme and equity in access to health care: evidence from a longitudinal household survey. Int J Equity Health 2013;12:20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-12-20.
  8. Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health: final report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.
  9. Wagstaff A, van Doorslaer E. Measuring and testing for inequity in the delivery of health care. J Hum Resour 2000;35(4):716-733. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/146369.
  10. Wang SI, Yaung CL. Vertical equity of healthcare in Taiwan: health services were distributed according to need. Int J Equity Health 2013;12:12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-12-12.
  11. Kutzin J. Health financing for universal coverage and health system performance: concepts and implications for policy. Bull World Health Organ 2013;91(8):602-611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.12.113985.
  12. Song KY, Kim YI, Lee EK. 1989 National health survey: morbidity and medical use. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 1990.
  13. Song KY, Nam JJ, Choi JS, Kim TJ. 1992 National health and health behavior survey: national health survey results. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 1993.
  14. Choi JS, Nam JJ, Kim TJ. Health and medical utilization status of Koreans: 1995 national health and health awareness survey. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 1995.
  15. Lee SY. Equity of medical service utilization and treatment burden ratio by city workers income level [dissertation]. Seoul: Seoul National University; 1997.
  16. Nam JJ, Choi JS, Kim TJ. 1998 National health and health behavior survey: national health survey results. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 1998.
  17. Kim DJ, Kim JE, Park EJ, Shin HS. Factors affecting the equity status and equity of medical usage by population. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 2011.
  18. Lee YJ. Analysis of equity of medical utilization by health status by income class. Korean Soc Policy 2010;17(1):267-290. https://doi.org/10.17000/kspr.17.1.201004.267
  19. Kim JJ, Oh JH, Moon OR, Kwon SM. Quantitative and qualitative difference in the utilization of health care-based on the survey of Gwangju-Jeonnam residents. Health Policy Manag 2007;17(3):26-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4332/kjhpa.2007.17.3.026.
  20. Shin HS, Kim DJ. In-depth analysis of the results of the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: health interview and health awareness part. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 2007.
  21. Moon SH. The burden of health care in Korea and the fairness of its benefits. Soc Secur Res 2004;20(1):59-81.
  22. Kwon SM, Yang BM, Lee TJ, Oh JW, Lee SH. Equity in health care utilization in Korea. Korean J Health Econ Policy 2003;9(2):13-23.
  23. Lee SI, Hong SC. Equity of health utilization by income level of Jeju citizen. Health Soc Sci 2003;11:147-168.
  24. Kim CW, Lee SY, Hong SC. A difference in utilization of cancer inpatient services by income class of residents in Jeju island. Health Policy Manag 2003;13(3):104-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4332/kjhpa.2003.13.3.104.
  25. Lee YJ, Park CW. Changes in equity of medical usage by income class according to health status. Soc Welf Policy 2011;38(1):33-55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15855/swp.2011.38.1.33.
  26. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD health data. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2017.
  27. National Health Insurance Service. [Internal data]. Wonju: National Health Insurance Service; 2017.
  28. Christiansen F. Social division and peasant mobility in mainland China: the implications of the hu-k'ou system. Issues Stud 1990;26(4):23-42.
  29. Nolan B. Economic incentives, health status and health services utilisation. J Health Econ 1993;12(2):151-169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6296(93)90025-a.
  30. Paci P, Wagstaff A. Equity and efficiency in Italian health care. Health Econ 1993;2(1):15-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4730020104.
  31. Van Doorslaer EK, Wagstaff RA, Rutten FF. Distributive effects of cost containment in health care. Health Serv Res 1993;1:243.
  32. Leu R, Gerfin M. van Doorslaer E, Wagstaff A, Rutten F. Equity in the finance and delivery of health care in Switzerland. In: Van Doorslaer E, editor. Equity in the finance and delivery of health care an international perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993.
  33. Gottschalk P, Wolfe BL. Equity in the finance and delivery of health care: United States. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty; 1993.
  34. Maddala GS. Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994.
  35. Kim TI, Choi YY, Lee KH. Analysis of medical use gap according to income class. Soc Secur Res 2008;24(3):53-75.
  36. Kim DJ. Income-related inequity in health care use in Korea. Health Welf Forum 2011;176:45-54.
  37. Kim JG. Equity in the delivery of health care in Korea: focused on analysis by age groups. Soc Secur Res 2011;27(3):147-168.