• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.136-146
• /
• 2009

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of copayments for doctor visits and prescription drugs on health services utilization in the Type I Medicaid beneficiaries in Korea. Method: This study examined data from the 2007 survey on Health Services Use and Health Status of Medicaid Beneficiaries performed by the Ministry for Health Welfare and Family Affairs. To analyze these sample survey data, the SURVEYFREQ, SURVEYMEANS, and SURVEYREG procedures which incorporate the sample design into the analyses were used. Results: Findings of this study indicate that copayments for doctor visits and prescription drugs of Medicaid Type I beneficiaries have cut overall medical costs. However, although results should be interpreted very carefully because of the relatively low $R^2$, copayments have cut more health services utilization of people who need more health services because of their complex diseases and disability. In addition, besides copayment, several factors are affecting differences in health services utilization before and after copayments implementation. Conclusion: These results highlight the need to examine the effects of copayments more thoroughly according to the kinds of disease, the severity of disease, and the level of copayment.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.25 no.1 s.37
• /
• pp.73-87
• /
• 1992

The level of copayment increased in order to stabilize the financial condition of the health insurance on 1986. An important question regarding the policy was whether the increase in the level of copayments reduced the utilization of medical services in the poor selectively. In spite of the importance of the research question, no study has been reported. This study was designed to find out changes in numbers of physician visits, to explain characteristics influencing the difference of utilization before and after the program. Finally the interaction effect between the program and the level of income was examined for the abover question. A total of 10,421 persons from eight institutions was selected as the study sample. Research findings are as follows. 1. The number of physician visits decreased by ten percent as a result of increasing the level of copayment. 2. The decrease was remarkable in some groups such as children, rural area and large family. 3. The most important factor which explained the difference was the number of physician visits before the introduction of the new program. The more numbers of physian visits during the last year were, the more numbers of physian visits decreased after the program. 4. The interaction term between the program and the level of income was statistically significant in the multiple regression model which explained physician visits and its coefficient was negative. It means that an increase in copayment did not reduced the number of physician visits in the poor, selectively. 5. It can be concluded that imposing adequate copayment reduces the use of medical services as well as medical costs without serious damage in access especially for the poor people.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.99-128
• /
• 2008

Nearly all Koreans are insured through National Health Insurance(NHI). While NHI coverage is nearly universal, it is not complete. Coverage is largely limited to minimal level of hospital and physician expenses, and copayments are required in each case. As a result, Korea's public insurance system covers roughly 50% of overall individual health expenditures, and the remaining 50% consists of copayments for basic services, spending on services that are either not covered or poorly covered by the public system. In response to these gaps in the public system, 64% of the Korean population has supplemental private health insurance. Expansion of private health insurance raises negative externality issue. Like public financing schemes in other countries, the Korean system imposes cost-sharing on patients as a strategy for controlling utilization. Because most insurance policies reimburse patients for their out-of-pocket payments, supplemental insurance is likely to negate the impact of the policy, raising both total and public sector health spending. So far, most empirical analysis of supplemental health insurance to date has focused on the US Medigap programme. It is found that those with supplements apparently consume more health care. Two reasons for higher health care consumption by those with supplements suggest themselves. One is the moral hazard effect: by eliminating copayments and deductibles, supplements reduce the marginal price of care and induce additional consumption. The other explanation is that supplements are purchased by those who anticipate high health expenditures - adverse effect. The main issue addressed has been the separation of the moral hazard effect from the adverse selection one. The general conclusion is that the evidence on adverse selection based on observable variables is mixed. This article investigates the extent to which private supplementary insurance affect use of health care services by public health insurance enrollees, using Korean administrative data and private supplements related data collected through all relevant private insurance companies. I applied a multivariate two-part model to analyze the effects of various types of supplements on the likelihood and level of public health insurance spending and estimated marginal effects of supplements. Separate models were estimated for inpatients and outpatients in public insurance spending. The first part of the model estimated the likelihood of positive spending using probit regression, and the second part estimated the log of spending for those with positive spending. Use of a detailed information of individuals' public health insurance from administration data and of private insurance status from insurance companies made it possible to control for health status, the types of supplemental insurance owned by theses individuals, and other factors that explain spending variations across supplemental insurance categories in isolating the effects of supplemental insurance. Data from 2004 to 2006 were used, and this study found that private insurance increased the probability of a physician visit by less than 1 percent and a hospital admission by about 1 percent. However, supplemental insurance was not found to be associated with a bigger health care service utilization. Two-part models of health care utilization and expenditures showed that those without supplemental insurance had higher inpatient and outpatient expenditures than those with supplements, even after controlling for observable differences.