The impact of the new cooperative medical scheme on financial burden of tuberculosis patients: evidence from six counties in China

Abstract

BackgroundTuberculosis (TB) patients in China encounter heavy financial burdens throughout the course of their treatment and it is unclear how China’s health insurance systems affect the alleviation of this burden under the integrated approach. This study aimed to measure reimbursement for TB services under the New Cooperative Medical Scheme (NCMS) in rural China and to evaluate changes in catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) caused by the reimbursement policies.MethodsReimbursement data were obtained from routine data systems for the NCMS in Yichang (YC) and Hanzhong (HZ). 1884 TB inpatients reimbursed by NCMS from 2010 to 2012 were included. Household surveys were conducted. A total of 494 TB patients under the NCMS were selected in this paper. 12 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held. We measured the impact of the NCMS by counterfactual analysis, which analyzed the financial burden alleviation. Equity was assessed by Concentration Index (CI), and disaggregated by project sites.ResultsTB inpatients were reimbursed with an effective reimbursement rate of 57.3 %. Average out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for outpatient and inpatient services after diagnosis were 1413 yuan and 430 yuan, and 3572 yuan and 3013 yuan in YC and HZ, respectively. The reimbursement level for TB outpatient care after diagnosis was very low due to a limited outpatient quota. TB patients in HZ incurred higher effective reimbursement rates, but the incidence of CHE remained higher. The reduction of CHE incidence after the NCMS showed no difference statistically (P > 0.05). The severity of CHE was alleviated slightly. CIs after reimbursement were all below zero and their absolute values were higher than those before reimbursement.ConclusionsLow reimbursement for TB patients could lead to heavy financial burden. Poor TB patients incurred high rates of CHE. The NCMS was found to be a protective factor for CHE, but the impact was modest and the equity of CHE did not improve. The NCMS reimbursement policies should be improved in the future to include a more comprehensive coverage of care. Supplemental programs may be necessary to expand coverage for TB care.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40249-015-0094-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

RETRACTED ARTICLE: First report of the Phe1534Cyskdr mutation in natural populations of Aedes albopictusfrom Brazil

“…albopictus . A similar mutation was previously described in populations from Singapore [39], China [40] and Greece [41]. In this same 1534 position other alterations were described, 1534Leu and 1534Ser in the USA [41, 42] and China [40, 41].…”

“…A recent survey of Ae. albopictus from several countries, in North America, Europe and Asia, reported that the 1534 Na V position is highly variable due to the presence of different mutations such as: TTC and TTT (Phe) as well as the TGC (Cys), TCC (Ser) and TTG (Leu) [40]. This means that one has to know exactly which alleles in the target population exist before applying an AS-PCR approach, like the one herein.…”

“…The Phe1534Cys kdr mutation, similar to the most frequent kdr mutation in Ae. aegypti , was reported in Singapore [39], China [40] and Greece [41]; 1534Leu in the USA [42] and China [40, 41]; and 1534Ser also in the USA and China [41]. The substitution at the 1532 position (Ile1532Thr) appeared only in the Ae.…”

Active case finding among marginalised and vulnerable populations reduces catastrophic costs due to tuberculosis diagnosis

“…As a result of this, total costs as a proportion of pre-TB AHI and catastrophic costs were concentrated in the poorest two income quintiles. These findings are consistent with findings globally [8,37]. …”

“…India might take lessons from China where, despite social insurance schemes, the catastrophic costs due to TB have decreased marginally with no effect on inequity. One of the reasons was limited outpatient costs coverage [35,37,41]. …”