BackgroundPopulation aging accompanied by multimorbidity imposes a great burden on households and the healthcare system. This study aimed to determine the incidence and determinants of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) in the households of old people with multimorbidity in China.MethodsData were obtained from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) conducted in 2018, with 3,511 old people (≥60 years) with multimorbidity responding to the survey on behalf of their households. CHE was identified using two thresholds: ≥10% of out-of-pocket (OOP) health spending in total household expenditure (THE) and ≥40% of OOP health spending in household capacity to pay (CTP) measured by non-food household expenditure. Logistic regression models were established to identify the individual and household characteristics associated with CHE incidence.ResultsThe median values of THE, OOP health spending, and CTP reached 19,900, 1,500, and 10,520 Yuan, respectively. The CHE incidence reached 31.5% using the ≥40% CTP threshold and 45.6% using the ≥10% THE threshold. It increased by the number of chronic conditions reported by the respondents (aOR = 1.293–1.855, p < 0.05) and decreased with increasing household economic status (aOR = 1.622–4.595 relative the highest quartile, p < 0.001). Hospital admissions over the past year (aOR = 6.707, 95% CI: 5.186 to 8.674) and outpatient visits over the past month (aOR = 4.891, 95% CI: 3.822 to 6.259) of the respondents were the strongest predictors of CHE incidence. The respondents who were male (aOR = 1.266, 95% CI: 1.054 to 1.521), married (OR = 1.502, 95% CI: 1.211 to 1.862), older than 70 years (aOR = 1.288–1.458 relative to 60–69 years, p < 0.05), completed primary (aOR = 1.328 relative to illiterate, 95% CI: 1.079 to 1.635) or secondary school education (aOR = 1.305 relative to illiterate, 95% CI: 1.002 to 1.701), lived in a small (≤2 members) household (aOR = 2.207, 95% CI: 1.825 to 2.669), and resided in the northeast region (aOR = 1.935 relative to eastern, 95% CI: 1.396 to 2.682) were more likely to incur CHE.ConclusionMultimorbidity is a significant risk of CHE. Household CHE incidence increases with the number of reported chronic conditions. Socioeconomic and regional disparities in CHE incidence persist in China.
Background Although both EQ-5D-3L(3L) and EQ-5D-5L(5L) have demonstrated good measurement properties in several patient populations, there is currently limited evidence comparing the measurement properties of 3L and 5L in family caregivers (FCs) of cancer patients. Purpose This study aimed to compare the measurement properties of 3L and 5L in a sample of family caregivers of cancer patients. Methods A consecutive sample of FCs of cancer patients recruited from three tertiary hospitals were invited to complete the two versions of the EQ-5D in two rounds of interviews. We compared i) the ceiling effect using the McNemar’s test, ii) test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen’s Kappa, iii) convergent validity using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, iv) known-group validity using F-statistic, v) and discriminant capacity using ordinal logistic regression. Results A total of 416 FCs completed the baseline questionnaire and 120 caregivers completed the follow-up questionnaire. Ceiling effects were smaller in 5L (12.5%) than in 3L (20.7%). The convergent validity (r=0.344-0.771), known-groups validity (Fratio5L/3L=2.06-4.09), discriminant capacity (ES=0.341-0.396), and test-retest reliability (Kappa = 0.619-0.722 and ICC= 0.725) of the 5L were slightly better than those of the 3L. Conclusion The current study found both 3L and 5L to be suitable for use by FCs of cancer patients. However, 5L showed superior measurement properties compared to 3L and therefore could be the preferred instrument when EQ-5D data of cancer patients FCs is required.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.