Search

Abstract Background Indonesia implemented one of the world’s largest single-payer national health insurance schemes (the Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional or JKN) in 2014. This study aims to assess the incidence of catastrophic health spending (CHS) and its determinants and trends between 2018 and 2019 by which time JKN enrolment coverage exceeded 80%. Methods This study analysed data collected from a two-round cross-sectional household survey conducted in ten provinces of Indonesia in February–April 2018 and August–October 2019. The incidence of CHS was defined as the proportion of households with out-of-pocket (OOP) health spending exceeding 10% of household consumption expenditure. Chi-squared tests were used to compare the incidences of CHS across subgroups for each household characteristic. Logistic regression models were used to investigate factors associated with incurring CHS and the trend over time. Sensitivity analyses assessing the incidence of CHS based on a higher threshold of 25% of total household expenditure were conducted. Results The overall incidence of CHS at the 10% threshold fell from 7.9% to 2018 to 4.4% in 2019. The logistic regression models showed that households with JKN membership experienced significantly lower incidence of CHS compared to households without insurance coverage in both years. The poorest households were more likely to incur CHS compared to households in other wealth quintiles. Other predictors of incurring CHS included living in rural areas and visiting private health facilities. Conclusions This study demonstrated that the overall incidence of CHS decreased in Indonesia between 2018 and 2019. OOP payments for health care and the risk of CHS still loom high among JKN members and among the lowest income households. More needs to be done to further contain OOP payments and further research is needed to investigate whether CHS pushes households below the poverty line.

Abstract Background Many countries implementing pro-poor reforms to expand subsidized health care, especially for the poor, recognize that high-quality healthcare, and not just access alone, is necessary to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. As the poor are more likely to use low quality health services, measures to improve access to health care need to emphasise quality as the cornerstone to achieving equity goals. Current methods to evaluate health systems financing equity fail to take into account measures of quality. This paper aims to provide a worked example of how to adapt a popular quantitative approach, Benefit Incidence Analysis (BIA), to incorporate a quality weighting into the computation of public subsidies for health care. Methods We used a dataset consisting of a sample of households surveyed in 10 provinces of Indonesia in early-2018. In parallel, a survey of public health facilities was conducted in the same geographical areas, and information about health facility infrastructure and basic equipment was collected. In each facility, an index of service readiness was computed as a measure of quality. Individuals who reported visiting a primary health care facility in the month before the interview were matched to their chosen facility. Standard BIA and an extended BIA that adjusts for service quality were conducted. Results Quality scores were relatively high across all facilities, with an average of 82%. Scores for basic equipment were highest, with an average score of 99% compared to essential medicines with an average score of 60%. Our findings from the quality-weighted BIA show that the distribution of subsidies for public primary health care facilities became less ‘pro-poor’ while private clinics became more ‘pro-rich’ after accounting for quality of care. Overall the distribution of subsidies became significantly pro-rich (CI = 0.037). Conclusions Routine collection of quality indicators that can be linked to individuals is needed to enable a comprehensive understanding of individuals’ pathways of care. From a policy perspective, accounting for quality of care in health financing assessment is crucial in a context where quality of care is a nationwide issue. In such a context, any health financing performance assessment is likely to be biased if quality is not accounted for.

Summary: Background: In 2014, Indonesia launched a single payer national health insurance scheme with the aim of covering the entire population by 2024. The objective of this paper is to assess the equity with which contributions to the health financing system were distributed in Indonesia over 2015 – 2019. Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Socioeconomic Survey of Indonesia (2015 – 2019). The relative progressivity of each health financing source and overall health financing was determined using a summary score, the Kakwani index. Findings: Around a third of health financing was sourced from out-of-pocket (OOP) payments each year, with direct taxes, indirect taxes and social health insurance (SHI) each taking up 15 – 20%. Direct taxes and OOP payments were progressive sources of health financing, and indirect tax payments regressive, for all of 2015 – 2019. SHI contributions were regressive except in 2017 and 2018. The overall health financing system was progressive from 2015 to 2018, but this declined year by year and became mildly regressive in 2019. Interpretation: The declining progressivity of the overall health financing system between 2015 – 2019 suggests that Indonesia still has a way to go in developing a fair and equitable health financing system that ensures the poor are financially protected. Funding: This study is supported through the Health Systems Research Initiative in the UK, and is jointly funded by the Department of International Development, the Economic and Social Research Council, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust.