The determinants of physician and pharmacist utilization and equity of access under Korean universal health insurance

This study examines the social and behavioral determinants of two types of primary care, seeing a physician or a pharmacist, for Koreans and evaluates the equity of the Korean national health insurance system. The study applies the Aday and Andersen access framework to cross-sectional data from the 1992 Korean National Health Interview Survey (N = 21,841).^ The study found that in Korea, the elderly were most likely, and children least likely, to have used physician services. Women, household heads, those in small families, and the less educated were more likely than their counterparts to use physician and pharmacist services. Health status and need were important determinants of Koreans seeing a doctor or a pharmacist. Differences in need substantially accounted for the original differences observed between subgroups. Resources associated with having insurance coverage, a regular source of care, and place of residence (rural/urban) ameliorated to some extent the subgroup differences in the use of physicians' and pharmacists' services among Koreans. They were also major independent predictors of access. Having insurance remains a particularly important predictor of who uses physician services. Among the insured, trade-offs in the use of physician and pharmacist services were found in the current system, i.e., uninsured and poor Koreans were more likely to use pharmacist services, while insured and rural Koreans were more likely to use doctor services. Among the insured, cost sharing rates are lower for physician than for pharmacist services. Self-employed persons were less likely than government and industrial workers to use physician services. An underlying expectation under universal health insurance was that the Korean health care system would be equitable. The research results, however, did not fully support this expectation.^ The policy implications of these findings are that measures are required to extend insurance coverage to the uninsured, to equalize differences in benefit packages between health plans, and to expand the availability of physicians in rural areas. Further research is also needed to understand those who do not currently have a regular source of care and why and the access barriers that may exist for selected demographic subgroups (those in large families and unmarried or divorced/widowed persons). ^

The determinants of improvements in health outcomes and of cost reduction in hospital inpatient care

This study aims to address two research questions. First, ‘Can we identify factors that are determinants both of improved health outcomes and of reduced costs for hospitalized patients with one of six common diagnoses?’ Second, ‘Can we identify other factors that are determinants of improved health outcomes for such hospitalized patients but which are not associated with costs?’ The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2003 to 2006 was employed in this study. The total study sample consisted of hospitals which had at least 30 patients each year for the given diagnosis: 954 hospitals for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), 1552 hospitals for congestive heart failure (CHF), 1120 hospitals for stroke (STR), 1283 hospitals for gastrointestinal hemorrhage (GIH), 979 hospitals for hip fracture (HIP), and 1716 hospitals for pneumonia (PNE). This study used simultaneous equations models to investigate the determinants of improvement in health outcomes and of cost reduction in hospital inpatient care for these six common diagnoses. In addition, the study used instrumental variables and two-stage least squares random effect model for unbalanced panel data estimation. The study concluded that a few factors were determinants of high quality and low cost. Specifically, high specialty was the determinant of high quality and low costs for CHF patients; small hospital size was the determinant of high quality and low costs for AMI patients. Furthermore, CHF patients who were treated in Midwest, South, and West region hospitals had better health outcomes and lower hospital costs than patients who were treated in Northeast region hospitals. Gastrointestinal hemorrhage and pneumonia patients who were treated in South region hospitals also had better health outcomes and lower hospital costs than patients who were treated in Northeast region hospitals. This study found that six non-cost factors were related to health outcomes for a few diagnoses: hospital volume, percentage emergency room admissions for a given diagnosis, hospital competition, specialty, bed size, and hospital region.^