新型农村合作医疗制度对慢性非传染性疾病患者的保障能力研究
|
摘要
研究背景
新型农村合作医疗制度是由政府组织、引导、支持,农民自愿参加,个人、集体和政府多方筹资,以大病统筹为主的农民医疗互助共济制度。自2003年试点运行以来,制度建设和保障效果不断得到完善与增强。到2009年底,覆盖超过94%的农村人口,累计补偿超过15亿人次,补偿金额超过1200亿元。但是,新农合制度发展的瓶颈也逐渐显现——在覆盖率和资金规模不断提高的背景下,如何不断增强新农合制度的保障能力?
日前,我国农村地区慢病流行越来越严重,慢病经济负担越来越沉重,慢病已经成为危害农村居民健康与经济风险的主要来源。慢病是一种可以通过干预实现有效预防、控制的一种疾病。由于慢病具有周期长、逆转性差等特点,要求慢病患者需要长期治疗,门诊费用及购药费用成为慢病患者疾病经济负担的主要来源。慢病的特殊性决定了其保障的特殊性。新农合制度对慢病患者保障不应仅仅是对其进行经济补偿,更重要的是通过医疗保障引导慢病患者合理选择就诊机构,通过医疗保障促进预防、保健等公共卫生服务的开展,实现对慢病患者保障的关口前移,从根本上降低慢病发病率,实现对慢病患者的保障。
研究目的
本研究的目标是在研究新农合制度保障慢病患者能力内涵与评价体系的基础上,分析新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力,结合慢病保障的特殊性,提出新农合制度加强对慢病患者保障的措施。具体目标包括：1)研究新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力的内涵与评价体系；2)分析新农合制度对农村慢病患者的保障能力,明确问题与影响因素；3)提出加强新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力建设的政策建议。
资料来源
本研究资料主要来源于文献复习和现场调查。文献资料来源于山东大学图书馆,包括电子期刊、杂志以及纸质图书以及国家宏观卫生统计资料、国家卫生服务调查等资料；调查数据来源十卢森堡-WHO-山东《山东省农村卫生人员培训与慢病控制项目》2007年基线调查和2010年终期调查的数据,包括入户调查、机构调查和关键人物访谈等。
研究方法
本研究在文献综述的基础上,对新农合制度的社会保险属性与新农合制度对参合农民保障的路径进行了分析,研究了新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力的内涵。
以保障能力内涵为基础,结合对现有新农合制度保障能力的综述,本研究建立了新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力的评价体系。从广度、深度与高度三个维度构建了新农合制度对慢病患者核心保障能力评价框架与指标体系；从保障健康和规范供需双方行为、促进慢病服务社会化三个纬度构建了新农合制度对慢病患者延伸保障能力的评价框架。
研究方法包括系统分析法、文献综述法、专家咨询法等。分析采用EXCELL、SPSS统计软件进行分析。
主要结果与发现
1新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力的内涵及评价体系
新农合制度的性质与功能是决定其保障能力内涵的基础。2003年试点之初,新农合制度被定义为“政府组织、引导、支持,农民自愿参加,个人、集体和政府多方筹资,以大病统筹为主的农民医疗互助共济制度。”在此之后有多位研究者认为新农合制度在推广过程中已经逐渐具备了社会医疗保险的属性。2010年10月,第十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十七次会议审议通过的《中华人民共和国社会保险法》正式将新农合制度纳入到我国社会医疗保险制度范畴内,标志着新农合制度正式成为我国社会医疗保险的组成部分。
根据医疗保险与社会医疗保险理论,新农合制度作为我国政府在农村地区建立的一项基本社会医疗保险,应该具备社会福利性、强制性、经济性和公益性,在具备保障参合农民经济风险的核心能力的基础上,还应具备保障慢病患者健康、引导慢病患者合理就医和促进公共卫生服务的能力。
理论上,新农合制度主要通过以下几个途径给予慢病患者保障：直接补偿慢病患者在各级卫生机构产生的医疗费用,补偿慢病患者购药产生的费用：引导慢病患者合理选择就诊机构降低医疗费用；促进向慢病患者提供公共卫生服务,包括健康查体、建立健康档案,以降低慢病发病率和控制病情发展。
以新农合制度属性和功能为基础,结合新农合制度保障慢病患者的途径,综合慢病保障的特殊性,本研究认为新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力分为两部分：核心保障能力,即抵抗经济风险的能力和延伸保障能力,即通过促进居民卫生服务可及性以保障居民健康的功能、规范参合居民就医行为的功能和促进健康查体、建立健康档案等慢病卫生服务社会化的功能。
2农村慢病流行情况
基线调查时,农村地区高血压的患病率为10.50%,男性高于女性,高收入组最高,男性并发症发生率高于女性；糖尿病患病率为1.05%,女性高于男性,高收入组最高；其他慢病的患病率为7.21%,以冠心病、阻塞性肺疾病为主,患病率分别为2.27%和1.38%。终期调查时,高血压和糖尿病患者的患病率分别为17.19%和3.04%。
3样本地区新农合制度对慢病的优惠补偿政策
基线调查时,莱城区、广饶县、宁阳县和苍山县制定了新农合制度对慢病的优惠补偿政策。终期调查时,8个样本县均制定了新农合制度对慢病优惠补偿政策。门诊补偿：项目县(市、区)新农合制度慢病优惠政策中,一级医疗机构门诊报销比例为30%-60%,以30%-45%之间为主。住院补偿：项目县(市、区)新农合制度慢病优惠政策中,新农合制度对慢病患者乡镇卫生院(一级医院)住院报销比例在40%-70%之间,二级医院住院报销比例15%-70%之间。
4新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力分析
1)新农合制度对慢病患者的核心保障能力分析。主要包括广度分析、深度分析和高度分析。①广度指标分析发现：基线调查时,新农合制度对慢病患者的覆盖率已经超过了90%。两次调查新农合制度对高血压、糖尿病患者的覆盖率分别为93.61%,92.04%和92.60%和86.52%,对高收入患者的覆盖率高于低收入患者。按照我国民政部门贫困标准,两次调查对高血压和糖尿病患者致贫率降低的幅度分别为1.32%,5.17%和9.12%,4.00%,对高收入患者的影响大于对低收入患者的影响,样本地区之间存在差异。按照世界银行标准,两次调查对高血压和糖尿病患者致贫率降低的幅度分别为1.54%,2.70%和8.71%,3.45%,对高收入患者的影响大于对低收入患者的影响,样本地区之间存在差异。基线调查时慢病患者的受益率为29.84%。两次调查,高血压和糖尿病患者的受益率分别为28.64%,27.84%和45.56%,29.08%,不同收入组之问受益率没有统计学差异,样本地区之间存在差异。②深度指标分析发现：新农合制度对慢病患者的补偿比为4.71%,其中高血压患者一次门诊、住院的补偿比分别为4.65%,11.39%,糖尿病患者的补偿比分别为5.71%,16.91%,其他慢病患者一年费用的补偿比为4.23%；两次调查新农合制度对高血压和糖尿病患者一年的补偿比分别为4.34%,4.95%和26.98%,24.10%,对高收入患者的补偿比略高于低收入患者。新农合制度补偿降低高血压患者一次门诊、住院的灾难性卫生支出平均差距分别为6.54%,13.13%,降低糖尿病患者一次门诊、住院的灾难性卫生支出平均差距分别为2.87%,26.99%,其他慢病患者为8.07%。两次调查显示,新农合制度降低高血压和糖尿病患者一年费用的灾难性卫生支出平均差距分别为11.64%,4.66%和26.69%,48.10%,对高收入患者的影响程度较大,不同样本地区之间存在差异。按照民政部贫困标准,新农合制度补偿降低高血压患者一次门诊、住院贫困缺口率的幅度分别为0.22%,29.17%,糖尿病患者的两项指标分别为2.02%,7.69%,其他慢病患者的指标为10.33%；两次调查,新农合制度降低高血压和糖尿病患者贫困缺口率的幅度分别为2.08%,20.34%和15.98%,13.13%,对不同收入高血压患者影响没有统计学差异,对高收入糖尿病患者影响程度较大。按照世界银行的标准,新农合制度降低高血压患者的一次门诊和住院贫困缺口率的幅度分别为0,22.54%,糖尿病患者分别为0.91%,6.42%,其他慢病一年指标为14.29%。两次调查显示,新农合制度降低高血压患者和糖尿病患者贫困缺口率分别为1.93%,9.09%和11.76%,8.33%,对不同收入高血压患者的影响没有统计学差异,对高收入糖尿病患者的影响大于低收入患者。③高度指标分析,即公平性指标分析。筹资公平性：高血压、糖尿病和其他慢病患者的筹资公平性指数分别为0.9831,0.9968和0.9954,终期调查时,高血压和糖尿病患者的筹资公平性指数分别为0.8162和0.8123,较基线调查时有所降低。补偿公平性：按照收入由低到高,不同收入组患者年自付医疗费用占个人可支配收入的比例分别为262.00%,138.15%,71.23%,47.65%和29.12%。两次调查时,慢病患者补偿Lorenz曲线均位于绝对公平线下方,高收入组患者获得的新农合制度补偿高于低收入组患者。
2)不同补偿比时新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力测算。分别以门诊补偿比例为20%,30%,40%和50%时,住院补偿比例为40%,50%,60%,70%时,对新农合保障慢病患者的能力进行了测算。门诊补偿比例由20%增加到50%,新农合补偿降低高血压患者致贫率的幅度由7.32%上升到28.21%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距的幅度由15.73%增加到41.91%,降低贫困缺口率的幅度由8.41%增加到35.01%。门诊补偿比例由20%提高到50%,糖尿病患者人均获得新农合门诊补偿的金额从211.31元增加到762.62元,降低贫困率的幅度由16.54%增加到31.13%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距的幅度从10.01%升高到30.23%,降低贫困缺口率的幅度由9.89%增加到30.43%。住院补偿比例有40%增加到70%,新农合制度降低高血压患者贫困率的幅度由21.57%增加到35.21%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距由16.32%增加到30.61%,降低贫困缺口率由40.64%增加到56.72%。对糖尿病患者住致贫率降低幅度由6.78%增加到26.01%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距由37.61%和53.24%,降低贫困缺口率由16.35%升高到32.42%。
3)新农合制度对慢病患者延伸保障能力分析。①两次调查显示,高血压患者和糖尿病患者的四周就诊率分别提高了8.63%和7.63%,住院率分别提高了54.07%和2.01%。②高血压患者和糖尿病患者最近一次门诊选择村卫生室的比例分别提高了11.74%和317.04%,低收入患者提高的幅度大于高收入患者；高血压患者选择乡镇卫生院住院的比例分别提高了108.16%。③高血压患者和糖尿病患者从村卫生室购买药物的比例分别提高了15.46%和79.44%,低收入患者选择村卫生室购药的比例升高,而高收入患者选择村卫生室购药的比例下降。④样本地区制定了规范定点医疗机构服务行为的措施,包括明确机构责任、医生处方行为等。其中,寿光市新农合制度管理办公室专门制定了《寿光市新型农村合作医疗特殊慢性病门诊统筹》,对慢性病定点医疗机构的职责做出了明确规定。⑤样本地区多开展了新农合制度健康查体措施,并结合健康查体为农民建立了健康档案。不仅提高了农民参合的积极性,更有效的实现了对慢病高危人群的早发现、早干预,以及对慢病患者的疾病管理,控制了病情的发展。
结论及政策建议
本研究认为新农合制度对慢病患者的核心保障能力与全人群水平还有一定差距；新农合制度对慢病患者的延伸保障能力还存在较大潜力,需要进一步挖掘,以提高新农合制度保障能力。新农合实行慢病优惠补偿政策以及其他相关措施以后,新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力有明显提高。
为进一步提高新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力,结合慢病保证的特殊性与分析结果,本研究提出以下建议：提高基层卫生机构新农合制度报销比例,增强新农合制度保障慢病患者的效率；提高新农合制度补偿比例,增强新农合制度降低慢病患者“因病致贫”能力：实行慢病患者与非慢病患者差别管理,增强新农合制度保障慢病患者的能力；提高慢病患者门诊补偿标准,增强新农合制度保障慢病患者的针对性；将慢病逐步纳入大病统筹,增强新农合制度对特殊人群的保障能力；关注慢病患者药店购药行为,引导慢病患者合理选择购药机构；资金使用向贫困人口倾斜,提高新农合制度补偿公平性；将新农合制度与农村基本公共卫生服务工作有机结合,促进慢病预防控制工作
Background
New rural cooperative medical scheme (NCMS) is a form of social health insurance scheme, which, since its inception in 2003, is subsidized voluntary health insurance program. The scheme's focuses on the "inpatient-fee pool", and also pay attention to the outpatient expenditure. Since the pilot in 2003, the scheme has been developed rapidly while the coverage and the fund have both got new high level. At the end of 2009, the scheme has covered more than 94%of rural residents, and more than 1.5 billion person times got reimbursements from scheme, and the total reimbursement was more than 120 billion RMB yuan. However, the barrier of NCMS'long-term development is becoming clearer:with the rapid development of coverage and fund, how to improve the NCMS'capacity of protecting?
At present, the prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in rural China is becoming serious, while the disease economic burden becoming heavier and heavier. The NCDs have become the major cause of rural residents' health and economic risk. In accordance with the NCDs prevention theory, the NCDs' prevention should follow the "three early" principle, which is early find, early diagnose and early treat. The "three early" principle helps to reduce the incidence of NCDs and finally reduce the economic risk of rural residents with NCDs. However, because we did not recognized the importance of NCDs control during the social-economic change, the incidence of NCDs is getting higher rapidly while the economic burden is getting heavier. Under the circumstance, the first job is to establish the health insurance in order to reimburse the rural residents with NCDs. So that their health care availability will be improved and they will get their health insured.
Now, the NCMS the only health insurance which aims to cover all the rural residents protects rural residents. Only to clear the denotation of NCMS'capacity of protection and the current situation of NCMS protecting rural residents with NCDs, can we improve the NCMS in order to strengthen its protection capacity.
Objectives
The objective of the study is to analyze the NCMS's capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs. and to suggest the recommendations for improving the NCMS in the future on the basis of studying the denotation of NCMS'protecting capacity and the evaluation. The following special objectives are included:studying the denotation and the evaluation system of NCMS" capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs, analysis of the current situation of NCMS' ability in protecting rural residents with NCDs and making the shortcomings and the advantages clear, supposing recommendations to improve the NCMS'capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs.
Resources
The resources of the study include the literatures and investigation. The literatures come from the library of Shandong University, including e-books, e-magazines, books and macroscopically health statistics data basis. The investigation datum roots in baseline investigation and final investigation of Luxemburg-WHO-Shandong rural health workers training and chronic non-communicable diseases control program, including household investigation, institution investigation and informational interview.
Methodology
The study analyzes the pathway of NCMS protecting rural residents with NCDs based on the literature review, then studies the denotation of NCMS' capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs.
Taking denotation of NCMS'protect ability as the basis, the study constructs the system for evaluating NCMS' protect ability for rural residents with NCDs combining literature review on NCMS protect ability. The evaluation system for NCMS' core protect ability includes breadth, depth and height; the connotative protect ability includes guarantee health of rural residents with NCDs, regulating the health providers'and demanders'behavior, promoting the health care for NCDs to be socialized.
The study methods include systematic analysis, literature review, expert consultation and so on. Univariate analysis and description analysis with SPSS software are used to address the data.
Results and findings
I The denotation and evaluation system of NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs
The nature and functions determine the denotation of NCMS's ability of protecting rural residents with NCDs. At the beginning of pilot, the NCMS was defined as a commune to help system between rural residents. After that, lots of researchers argued that the NCMS has got the nature of health insurance. In October,2010, the Insurance Law of Peoples Republic of China take NCMS as an health insurance, which meaned that NCMS have become part of health insurance system and got the nature of health insurance.
In accordance with the theory of health insurance and social health insurance, NCMS should perform social welfare, mandatory, economy and public welfare as one of social health insurance of our country. Besides the core ability, reducing economic risk of rural residents with NCDs, NCMS should also have the function of guaranteeing the health of rural residents with NCDs, regulating health providers'and demanders" behavior, and making health care for controlling NCDs be socialized, which includes health examination and establishment of health files.
Theoretically, NCMS protects rural residents with NCDs by three pathways:directly reimburse health expenditures occurring in health organizations and drug stores, guide the rural residents with NCDs reasonably chose health organizations, provide public health care, including health examination and establishing health files, to rural residents with NCDs.
On basis of nature and functions of NCMS, the paper argues that NCMS'ability of protecting rural residents includes two parts:core ability, which means reducing economic risk, and connotative ability, which means guaranteeing health, guiding health behavior and public health care.
2 Prevalence of NCDs in rural areas
The prevalence of hypertension and diabetes in rural areas was 10.50%and 1.05%, prevalence of female is higher than male, high incomes higher than low incomes when baseline investigation. The other NCDs includes cardiovascular and COPD and so on. The final investigation shows that the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes is 17.19%and 3.04%, which is relatively lower than that of baseline.
3 The NCMS policy on reimbursement to rural residents with NCDs
In 2007, there were four counties, Laicheng, Guangrao, Ningyang and Cangshan, which made NCMS policies on reimbursement to rural residents with NCDs, while the number become eight in 2010. In accordance with the policies, the reimbursement ratio of outpatient in township health center is between 30%and 60%, which is between 30%and 50%in county hospitals. The reimbursement ratio of inpatient is between 40%and 70%in township health centers, which is between 15%and 70%in county hospitals.
4 Analysis of NCMS ability of protecting rural residents with NCDs
1) Analysis of NCMS'core ability of protecting rural residents with NCDs. NCMS has covered more than 90%of the rural residents with NCDs in 2007. And the coverage of hypertension and diabetes is 93.61%,92.04%and 92.71%,86.52%respectively in 2007 and 2010. NCMS covers more high income rural residents with NCDs. On basis of China poverty line, NCMS reduce poverty rates of hypertension and diabetes by 1.32%,5.17% and 9.12%,4.00%respectively in 2007 and 2010, which is higher in high income patients, so is between sample counties. In accordance with World Bank poverty line, NCMS reduce poverty rates of hypertension and diabetes by 1.54%,2.70%and 8.71%,3.45%in 2007 and 2010 respectively, which is higher in high income patients, so is between counties. The benefit rate was 29.84%in 2007. which of hypertension and diabetes is 28.64%,27.84%and 45.56%,29.08%in 2007 and 2010 respectively, which is different between counties.
The ratio of reimbursement for rural residents with NCDs was 4.71%, while the ratio of reimbursement for one outpatient and inpatient was 4.65%and 8.39%respectively in 2007. The ratio of reimbursement for diabetes' outpatient and inpatient was 5.71%and 7.91% respectively, while the other NCDs was 4.23%in 2007. The reimbursement ratio for hypertension and diabetes annual health expenditure is 4.34%,4.95%and 26.98%,24.10% respectively in 2007 and 2010, which is a little higher in high income patients. NCMS reduces the catastrophic health expenditure gap of hypertension outpatient and inpatient was 6.54%and 13.13%respectively in 2007, which of diabetes was 2.87%and 26.99% respectively. The catastrophic health expenditure gap of hypertension and diabetes reduced 11.64%,4.66%and 26.69%,48.10%respectively by NCMS in 2007 and 2010. In accordance with China poverty line, NCMS reduce positive poverty gap of hypertension outpatient expenditure and inpatient expenditure was 31.35%and 1.57%respectively in 2007, which of diabetes was 8.04%and 6.16%respectively. NCMS reduces the positive poverty gap of hypertension and diabetes by 26.28%,15.98%and 20.34%,13.13%respectively in 2007 and 2010, which is higher in high income rural residents with diabetes. On basis of World Bank poverty line, the positive poverty gap of hypertension outpatient and inpatient expenditure was reduced by 0 and 22.54%respectively in 2007, which was 2.28%and 6.42%respectively. NCMS reduces the positive poverty gap of hypertension and diabetes annual health expenditure by 1.93%,21.57%and 9.09%,58.33%respectively in 2007 and 2010. The equity of protect ability shows that the index of financing equity for hypertension patients, diabetes patients and other NCDs patients was 0.9831,0.9968 and 0.9954 respectively in 2007, which of hypertension and diabetes is 0.8162 and 0.8123 respectively in 2010. The Lorenz curve is below the absolute equity curve, which means that the reimbursement of NCMS concentrates in high income crowd.
2) Analysis of the NCMS's capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs under different reimbursement ratio. The paper analyses the NCMS's capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs with the outpatient reimbursement ratio is 20%,30%,40%and 50%respectively, and the inpatient reimbursement ratio is 40%,50%,60%and 70%. When the ourpatient reimbursement rarion increased to 50%from 20%, the percentage change of poverty ratio increased to 28.21%from 7.32%, which of catastrophic health expenditure poverty increases to 41.91%from 15.73%, and that of positive poverty gap increases to 35.01%from 8.41%.
3) Analysis of NCMS'connotative capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs Percentage of hypertension patients and diabetes patients visit doctor in four weeks prior the investigation increases by 8.63%and 7.63%respectively, while the percentage of inpatient attendance increase by 54.07%and 2.01%respectively. Percentage of rural residents with hypertension and those with diabetes chose village clinic center increase by 11.74%and 317.04%respectively. And the difference is significant among income group. The low income patients are affected more by the policy change. And the percentage of hypertension patients who have inpatient services in township health center increase by 108.16% significantly. The percentage of rural residents with hypertension and those with diabetes who buy medicine from village clinic center increase by 15.46%and 79.44%respectively, while low income patients prefer village clinic center better than the high income patients. To regulate health providers" behavior, the management office of sample counties all made measurements, such as clearing the responsibility of health organization, prescription of doctor and so on, in order to control the health expenditure. Especially, the management office of NCMS in Shouguang constructs regulations on chronic outpatients funds pool of new rural cooperative medical scheme>, which make the special responsibility of health provider clear. At the same time, NCMS in sample counties also provide health examination to rural residents who participate into NCMS, and establish health files for them. These measurements not only let more rural residents like to participate in NCMS, but also make the "early find" and "early intervention" to NCDs come true on basis of NCDs patient management. Finally, these measurements which will help strengthen NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs will help control the disease development and reduce the economic risk.
Conclusions and recommendations
The study argues that the breadth index of NCMS protect rural residents with NCDs is higher than average of total group, however the depth index is far below the average of total group of NCMS while the height index is similar. Therefore, the big potential protect ability need to be developed. Overall, NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs is weak.
In order to improve NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs. following recommendations are provided:increasing reimbursement rate in root health care services in order to improve the efficient of protecting rural residents with NCDs, giving rural residents with NCDs more reimbursement in order to help them against "poverty because of diseases" making special reimbursement policy for rural residents with NCDs, increasing reimbursement rate of outpatient, putting NCDs into heavy disease burden pool, giving reimbursement to medicine fee in drug stores, changing equity of reimbursement, combining NCMS with public health works to help improve NCDs prevention.
新型农村合作医疗制度是由政府组织、引导、支持,农民自愿参加,个人、集体和政府多方筹资,以大病统筹为主的农民医疗互助共济制度。自2003年试点运行以来,制度建设和保障效果不断得到完善与增强。到2009年底,覆盖超过94%的农村人口,累计补偿超过15亿人次,补偿金额超过1200亿元。但是,新农合制度发展的瓶颈也逐渐显现——在覆盖率和资金规模不断提高的背景下,如何不断增强新农合制度的保障能力?
日前,我国农村地区慢病流行越来越严重,慢病经济负担越来越沉重,慢病已经成为危害农村居民健康与经济风险的主要来源。慢病是一种可以通过干预实现有效预防、控制的一种疾病。由于慢病具有周期长、逆转性差等特点,要求慢病患者需要长期治疗,门诊费用及购药费用成为慢病患者疾病经济负担的主要来源。慢病的特殊性决定了其保障的特殊性。新农合制度对慢病患者保障不应仅仅是对其进行经济补偿,更重要的是通过医疗保障引导慢病患者合理选择就诊机构,通过医疗保障促进预防、保健等公共卫生服务的开展,实现对慢病患者保障的关口前移,从根本上降低慢病发病率,实现对慢病患者的保障。
研究目的
本研究的目标是在研究新农合制度保障慢病患者能力内涵与评价体系的基础上,分析新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力,结合慢病保障的特殊性,提出新农合制度加强对慢病患者保障的措施。具体目标包括：1)研究新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力的内涵与评价体系；2)分析新农合制度对农村慢病患者的保障能力,明确问题与影响因素；3)提出加强新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力建设的政策建议。
资料来源
本研究资料主要来源于文献复习和现场调查。文献资料来源于山东大学图书馆,包括电子期刊、杂志以及纸质图书以及国家宏观卫生统计资料、国家卫生服务调查等资料；调查数据来源十卢森堡-WHO-山东《山东省农村卫生人员培训与慢病控制项目》2007年基线调查和2010年终期调查的数据,包括入户调查、机构调查和关键人物访谈等。
研究方法
本研究在文献综述的基础上,对新农合制度的社会保险属性与新农合制度对参合农民保障的路径进行了分析,研究了新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力的内涵。
以保障能力内涵为基础,结合对现有新农合制度保障能力的综述,本研究建立了新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力的评价体系。从广度、深度与高度三个维度构建了新农合制度对慢病患者核心保障能力评价框架与指标体系；从保障健康和规范供需双方行为、促进慢病服务社会化三个纬度构建了新农合制度对慢病患者延伸保障能力的评价框架。
研究方法包括系统分析法、文献综述法、专家咨询法等。分析采用EXCELL、SPSS统计软件进行分析。
主要结果与发现
1新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力的内涵及评价体系
新农合制度的性质与功能是决定其保障能力内涵的基础。2003年试点之初,新农合制度被定义为“政府组织、引导、支持,农民自愿参加,个人、集体和政府多方筹资,以大病统筹为主的农民医疗互助共济制度。”在此之后有多位研究者认为新农合制度在推广过程中已经逐渐具备了社会医疗保险的属性。2010年10月,第十一届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十七次会议审议通过的《中华人民共和国社会保险法》正式将新农合制度纳入到我国社会医疗保险制度范畴内,标志着新农合制度正式成为我国社会医疗保险的组成部分。
根据医疗保险与社会医疗保险理论,新农合制度作为我国政府在农村地区建立的一项基本社会医疗保险,应该具备社会福利性、强制性、经济性和公益性,在具备保障参合农民经济风险的核心能力的基础上,还应具备保障慢病患者健康、引导慢病患者合理就医和促进公共卫生服务的能力。
理论上,新农合制度主要通过以下几个途径给予慢病患者保障：直接补偿慢病患者在各级卫生机构产生的医疗费用,补偿慢病患者购药产生的费用：引导慢病患者合理选择就诊机构降低医疗费用；促进向慢病患者提供公共卫生服务,包括健康查体、建立健康档案,以降低慢病发病率和控制病情发展。
以新农合制度属性和功能为基础,结合新农合制度保障慢病患者的途径,综合慢病保障的特殊性,本研究认为新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力分为两部分：核心保障能力,即抵抗经济风险的能力和延伸保障能力,即通过促进居民卫生服务可及性以保障居民健康的功能、规范参合居民就医行为的功能和促进健康查体、建立健康档案等慢病卫生服务社会化的功能。
2农村慢病流行情况
基线调查时,农村地区高血压的患病率为10.50%,男性高于女性,高收入组最高,男性并发症发生率高于女性；糖尿病患病率为1.05%,女性高于男性,高收入组最高；其他慢病的患病率为7.21%,以冠心病、阻塞性肺疾病为主,患病率分别为2.27%和1.38%。终期调查时,高血压和糖尿病患者的患病率分别为17.19%和3.04%。
3样本地区新农合制度对慢病的优惠补偿政策
基线调查时,莱城区、广饶县、宁阳县和苍山县制定了新农合制度对慢病的优惠补偿政策。终期调查时,8个样本县均制定了新农合制度对慢病优惠补偿政策。门诊补偿：项目县(市、区)新农合制度慢病优惠政策中,一级医疗机构门诊报销比例为30%-60%,以30%-45%之间为主。住院补偿：项目县(市、区)新农合制度慢病优惠政策中,新农合制度对慢病患者乡镇卫生院(一级医院)住院报销比例在40%-70%之间,二级医院住院报销比例15%-70%之间。
4新农合制度对慢病患者保障能力分析
1)新农合制度对慢病患者的核心保障能力分析。主要包括广度分析、深度分析和高度分析。①广度指标分析发现：基线调查时,新农合制度对慢病患者的覆盖率已经超过了90%。两次调查新农合制度对高血压、糖尿病患者的覆盖率分别为93.61%,92.04%和92.60%和86.52%,对高收入患者的覆盖率高于低收入患者。按照我国民政部门贫困标准,两次调查对高血压和糖尿病患者致贫率降低的幅度分别为1.32%,5.17%和9.12%,4.00%,对高收入患者的影响大于对低收入患者的影响,样本地区之间存在差异。按照世界银行标准,两次调查对高血压和糖尿病患者致贫率降低的幅度分别为1.54%,2.70%和8.71%,3.45%,对高收入患者的影响大于对低收入患者的影响,样本地区之间存在差异。基线调查时慢病患者的受益率为29.84%。两次调查,高血压和糖尿病患者的受益率分别为28.64%,27.84%和45.56%,29.08%,不同收入组之问受益率没有统计学差异,样本地区之间存在差异。②深度指标分析发现：新农合制度对慢病患者的补偿比为4.71%,其中高血压患者一次门诊、住院的补偿比分别为4.65%,11.39%,糖尿病患者的补偿比分别为5.71%,16.91%,其他慢病患者一年费用的补偿比为4.23%；两次调查新农合制度对高血压和糖尿病患者一年的补偿比分别为4.34%,4.95%和26.98%,24.10%,对高收入患者的补偿比略高于低收入患者。新农合制度补偿降低高血压患者一次门诊、住院的灾难性卫生支出平均差距分别为6.54%,13.13%,降低糖尿病患者一次门诊、住院的灾难性卫生支出平均差距分别为2.87%,26.99%,其他慢病患者为8.07%。两次调查显示,新农合制度降低高血压和糖尿病患者一年费用的灾难性卫生支出平均差距分别为11.64%,4.66%和26.69%,48.10%,对高收入患者的影响程度较大,不同样本地区之间存在差异。按照民政部贫困标准,新农合制度补偿降低高血压患者一次门诊、住院贫困缺口率的幅度分别为0.22%,29.17%,糖尿病患者的两项指标分别为2.02%,7.69%,其他慢病患者的指标为10.33%；两次调查,新农合制度降低高血压和糖尿病患者贫困缺口率的幅度分别为2.08%,20.34%和15.98%,13.13%,对不同收入高血压患者影响没有统计学差异,对高收入糖尿病患者影响程度较大。按照世界银行的标准,新农合制度降低高血压患者的一次门诊和住院贫困缺口率的幅度分别为0,22.54%,糖尿病患者分别为0.91%,6.42%,其他慢病一年指标为14.29%。两次调查显示,新农合制度降低高血压患者和糖尿病患者贫困缺口率分别为1.93%,9.09%和11.76%,8.33%,对不同收入高血压患者的影响没有统计学差异,对高收入糖尿病患者的影响大于低收入患者。③高度指标分析,即公平性指标分析。筹资公平性：高血压、糖尿病和其他慢病患者的筹资公平性指数分别为0.9831,0.9968和0.9954,终期调查时,高血压和糖尿病患者的筹资公平性指数分别为0.8162和0.8123,较基线调查时有所降低。补偿公平性：按照收入由低到高,不同收入组患者年自付医疗费用占个人可支配收入的比例分别为262.00%,138.15%,71.23%,47.65%和29.12%。两次调查时,慢病患者补偿Lorenz曲线均位于绝对公平线下方,高收入组患者获得的新农合制度补偿高于低收入组患者。
2)不同补偿比时新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力测算。分别以门诊补偿比例为20%,30%,40%和50%时,住院补偿比例为40%,50%,60%,70%时,对新农合保障慢病患者的能力进行了测算。门诊补偿比例由20%增加到50%,新农合补偿降低高血压患者致贫率的幅度由7.32%上升到28.21%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距的幅度由15.73%增加到41.91%,降低贫困缺口率的幅度由8.41%增加到35.01%。门诊补偿比例由20%提高到50%,糖尿病患者人均获得新农合门诊补偿的金额从211.31元增加到762.62元,降低贫困率的幅度由16.54%增加到31.13%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距的幅度从10.01%升高到30.23%,降低贫困缺口率的幅度由9.89%增加到30.43%。住院补偿比例有40%增加到70%,新农合制度降低高血压患者贫困率的幅度由21.57%增加到35.21%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距由16.32%增加到30.61%,降低贫困缺口率由40.64%增加到56.72%。对糖尿病患者住致贫率降低幅度由6.78%增加到26.01%,降低灾难性卫生支出平均差距由37.61%和53.24%,降低贫困缺口率由16.35%升高到32.42%。
3)新农合制度对慢病患者延伸保障能力分析。①两次调查显示,高血压患者和糖尿病患者的四周就诊率分别提高了8.63%和7.63%,住院率分别提高了54.07%和2.01%。②高血压患者和糖尿病患者最近一次门诊选择村卫生室的比例分别提高了11.74%和317.04%,低收入患者提高的幅度大于高收入患者；高血压患者选择乡镇卫生院住院的比例分别提高了108.16%。③高血压患者和糖尿病患者从村卫生室购买药物的比例分别提高了15.46%和79.44%,低收入患者选择村卫生室购药的比例升高,而高收入患者选择村卫生室购药的比例下降。④样本地区制定了规范定点医疗机构服务行为的措施,包括明确机构责任、医生处方行为等。其中,寿光市新农合制度管理办公室专门制定了《寿光市新型农村合作医疗特殊慢性病门诊统筹》,对慢性病定点医疗机构的职责做出了明确规定。⑤样本地区多开展了新农合制度健康查体措施,并结合健康查体为农民建立了健康档案。不仅提高了农民参合的积极性,更有效的实现了对慢病高危人群的早发现、早干预,以及对慢病患者的疾病管理,控制了病情的发展。
结论及政策建议
本研究认为新农合制度对慢病患者的核心保障能力与全人群水平还有一定差距；新农合制度对慢病患者的延伸保障能力还存在较大潜力,需要进一步挖掘,以提高新农合制度保障能力。新农合实行慢病优惠补偿政策以及其他相关措施以后,新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力有明显提高。
为进一步提高新农合制度对慢病患者的保障能力,结合慢病保证的特殊性与分析结果,本研究提出以下建议：提高基层卫生机构新农合制度报销比例,增强新农合制度保障慢病患者的效率；提高新农合制度补偿比例,增强新农合制度降低慢病患者“因病致贫”能力：实行慢病患者与非慢病患者差别管理,增强新农合制度保障慢病患者的能力；提高慢病患者门诊补偿标准,增强新农合制度保障慢病患者的针对性；将慢病逐步纳入大病统筹,增强新农合制度对特殊人群的保障能力；关注慢病患者药店购药行为,引导慢病患者合理选择购药机构；资金使用向贫困人口倾斜,提高新农合制度补偿公平性；将新农合制度与农村基本公共卫生服务工作有机结合,促进慢病预防控制工作
Background
New rural cooperative medical scheme (NCMS) is a form of social health insurance scheme, which, since its inception in 2003, is subsidized voluntary health insurance program. The scheme's focuses on the "inpatient-fee pool", and also pay attention to the outpatient expenditure. Since the pilot in 2003, the scheme has been developed rapidly while the coverage and the fund have both got new high level. At the end of 2009, the scheme has covered more than 94%of rural residents, and more than 1.5 billion person times got reimbursements from scheme, and the total reimbursement was more than 120 billion RMB yuan. However, the barrier of NCMS'long-term development is becoming clearer:with the rapid development of coverage and fund, how to improve the NCMS'capacity of protecting?
At present, the prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in rural China is becoming serious, while the disease economic burden becoming heavier and heavier. The NCDs have become the major cause of rural residents' health and economic risk. In accordance with the NCDs prevention theory, the NCDs' prevention should follow the "three early" principle, which is early find, early diagnose and early treat. The "three early" principle helps to reduce the incidence of NCDs and finally reduce the economic risk of rural residents with NCDs. However, because we did not recognized the importance of NCDs control during the social-economic change, the incidence of NCDs is getting higher rapidly while the economic burden is getting heavier. Under the circumstance, the first job is to establish the health insurance in order to reimburse the rural residents with NCDs. So that their health care availability will be improved and they will get their health insured.
Now, the NCMS the only health insurance which aims to cover all the rural residents protects rural residents. Only to clear the denotation of NCMS'capacity of protection and the current situation of NCMS protecting rural residents with NCDs, can we improve the NCMS in order to strengthen its protection capacity.
Objectives
The objective of the study is to analyze the NCMS's capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs. and to suggest the recommendations for improving the NCMS in the future on the basis of studying the denotation of NCMS'protecting capacity and the evaluation. The following special objectives are included:studying the denotation and the evaluation system of NCMS" capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs, analysis of the current situation of NCMS' ability in protecting rural residents with NCDs and making the shortcomings and the advantages clear, supposing recommendations to improve the NCMS'capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs.
Resources
The resources of the study include the literatures and investigation. The literatures come from the library of Shandong University, including e-books, e-magazines, books and macroscopically health statistics data basis. The investigation datum roots in baseline investigation and final investigation of Luxemburg-WHO-Shandong rural health workers training and chronic non-communicable diseases control program, including household investigation, institution investigation and informational interview.
Methodology
The study analyzes the pathway of NCMS protecting rural residents with NCDs based on the literature review, then studies the denotation of NCMS' capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs.
Taking denotation of NCMS'protect ability as the basis, the study constructs the system for evaluating NCMS' protect ability for rural residents with NCDs combining literature review on NCMS protect ability. The evaluation system for NCMS' core protect ability includes breadth, depth and height; the connotative protect ability includes guarantee health of rural residents with NCDs, regulating the health providers'and demanders'behavior, promoting the health care for NCDs to be socialized.
The study methods include systematic analysis, literature review, expert consultation and so on. Univariate analysis and description analysis with SPSS software are used to address the data.
Results and findings
I The denotation and evaluation system of NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs
The nature and functions determine the denotation of NCMS's ability of protecting rural residents with NCDs. At the beginning of pilot, the NCMS was defined as a commune to help system between rural residents. After that, lots of researchers argued that the NCMS has got the nature of health insurance. In October,2010, the Insurance Law of Peoples Republic of China take NCMS as an health insurance, which meaned that NCMS have become part of health insurance system and got the nature of health insurance.
In accordance with the theory of health insurance and social health insurance, NCMS should perform social welfare, mandatory, economy and public welfare as one of social health insurance of our country. Besides the core ability, reducing economic risk of rural residents with NCDs, NCMS should also have the function of guaranteeing the health of rural residents with NCDs, regulating health providers'and demanders" behavior, and making health care for controlling NCDs be socialized, which includes health examination and establishment of health files.
Theoretically, NCMS protects rural residents with NCDs by three pathways:directly reimburse health expenditures occurring in health organizations and drug stores, guide the rural residents with NCDs reasonably chose health organizations, provide public health care, including health examination and establishing health files, to rural residents with NCDs.
On basis of nature and functions of NCMS, the paper argues that NCMS'ability of protecting rural residents includes two parts:core ability, which means reducing economic risk, and connotative ability, which means guaranteeing health, guiding health behavior and public health care.
2 Prevalence of NCDs in rural areas
The prevalence of hypertension and diabetes in rural areas was 10.50%and 1.05%, prevalence of female is higher than male, high incomes higher than low incomes when baseline investigation. The other NCDs includes cardiovascular and COPD and so on. The final investigation shows that the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes is 17.19%and 3.04%, which is relatively lower than that of baseline.
3 The NCMS policy on reimbursement to rural residents with NCDs
In 2007, there were four counties, Laicheng, Guangrao, Ningyang and Cangshan, which made NCMS policies on reimbursement to rural residents with NCDs, while the number become eight in 2010. In accordance with the policies, the reimbursement ratio of outpatient in township health center is between 30%and 60%, which is between 30%and 50%in county hospitals. The reimbursement ratio of inpatient is between 40%and 70%in township health centers, which is between 15%and 70%in county hospitals.
4 Analysis of NCMS ability of protecting rural residents with NCDs
1) Analysis of NCMS'core ability of protecting rural residents with NCDs. NCMS has covered more than 90%of the rural residents with NCDs in 2007. And the coverage of hypertension and diabetes is 93.61%,92.04%and 92.71%,86.52%respectively in 2007 and 2010. NCMS covers more high income rural residents with NCDs. On basis of China poverty line, NCMS reduce poverty rates of hypertension and diabetes by 1.32%,5.17% and 9.12%,4.00%respectively in 2007 and 2010, which is higher in high income patients, so is between sample counties. In accordance with World Bank poverty line, NCMS reduce poverty rates of hypertension and diabetes by 1.54%,2.70%and 8.71%,3.45%in 2007 and 2010 respectively, which is higher in high income patients, so is between counties. The benefit rate was 29.84%in 2007. which of hypertension and diabetes is 28.64%,27.84%and 45.56%,29.08%in 2007 and 2010 respectively, which is different between counties.
The ratio of reimbursement for rural residents with NCDs was 4.71%, while the ratio of reimbursement for one outpatient and inpatient was 4.65%and 8.39%respectively in 2007. The ratio of reimbursement for diabetes' outpatient and inpatient was 5.71%and 7.91% respectively, while the other NCDs was 4.23%in 2007. The reimbursement ratio for hypertension and diabetes annual health expenditure is 4.34%,4.95%and 26.98%,24.10% respectively in 2007 and 2010, which is a little higher in high income patients. NCMS reduces the catastrophic health expenditure gap of hypertension outpatient and inpatient was 6.54%and 13.13%respectively in 2007, which of diabetes was 2.87%and 26.99% respectively. The catastrophic health expenditure gap of hypertension and diabetes reduced 11.64%,4.66%and 26.69%,48.10%respectively by NCMS in 2007 and 2010. In accordance with China poverty line, NCMS reduce positive poverty gap of hypertension outpatient expenditure and inpatient expenditure was 31.35%and 1.57%respectively in 2007, which of diabetes was 8.04%and 6.16%respectively. NCMS reduces the positive poverty gap of hypertension and diabetes by 26.28%,15.98%and 20.34%,13.13%respectively in 2007 and 2010, which is higher in high income rural residents with diabetes. On basis of World Bank poverty line, the positive poverty gap of hypertension outpatient and inpatient expenditure was reduced by 0 and 22.54%respectively in 2007, which was 2.28%and 6.42%respectively. NCMS reduces the positive poverty gap of hypertension and diabetes annual health expenditure by 1.93%,21.57%and 9.09%,58.33%respectively in 2007 and 2010. The equity of protect ability shows that the index of financing equity for hypertension patients, diabetes patients and other NCDs patients was 0.9831,0.9968 and 0.9954 respectively in 2007, which of hypertension and diabetes is 0.8162 and 0.8123 respectively in 2010. The Lorenz curve is below the absolute equity curve, which means that the reimbursement of NCMS concentrates in high income crowd.
2) Analysis of the NCMS's capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs under different reimbursement ratio. The paper analyses the NCMS's capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs with the outpatient reimbursement ratio is 20%,30%,40%and 50%respectively, and the inpatient reimbursement ratio is 40%,50%,60%and 70%. When the ourpatient reimbursement rarion increased to 50%from 20%, the percentage change of poverty ratio increased to 28.21%from 7.32%, which of catastrophic health expenditure poverty increases to 41.91%from 15.73%, and that of positive poverty gap increases to 35.01%from 8.41%.
3) Analysis of NCMS'connotative capacity of protecting rural residents with NCDs Percentage of hypertension patients and diabetes patients visit doctor in four weeks prior the investigation increases by 8.63%and 7.63%respectively, while the percentage of inpatient attendance increase by 54.07%and 2.01%respectively. Percentage of rural residents with hypertension and those with diabetes chose village clinic center increase by 11.74%and 317.04%respectively. And the difference is significant among income group. The low income patients are affected more by the policy change. And the percentage of hypertension patients who have inpatient services in township health center increase by 108.16% significantly. The percentage of rural residents with hypertension and those with diabetes who buy medicine from village clinic center increase by 15.46%and 79.44%respectively, while low income patients prefer village clinic center better than the high income patients. To regulate health providers" behavior, the management office of sample counties all made measurements, such as clearing the responsibility of health organization, prescription of doctor and so on, in order to control the health expenditure. Especially, the management office of NCMS in Shouguang constructs regulations on chronic outpatients funds pool of new rural cooperative medical scheme>, which make the special responsibility of health provider clear. At the same time, NCMS in sample counties also provide health examination to rural residents who participate into NCMS, and establish health files for them. These measurements not only let more rural residents like to participate in NCMS, but also make the "early find" and "early intervention" to NCDs come true on basis of NCDs patient management. Finally, these measurements which will help strengthen NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs will help control the disease development and reduce the economic risk.
Conclusions and recommendations
The study argues that the breadth index of NCMS protect rural residents with NCDs is higher than average of total group, however the depth index is far below the average of total group of NCMS while the height index is similar. Therefore, the big potential protect ability need to be developed. Overall, NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs is weak.
In order to improve NCMS's ability to protect rural residents with NCDs. following recommendations are provided:increasing reimbursement rate in root health care services in order to improve the efficient of protecting rural residents with NCDs, giving rural residents with NCDs more reimbursement in order to help them against "poverty because of diseases" making special reimbursement policy for rural residents with NCDs, increasing reimbursement rate of outpatient, putting NCDs into heavy disease burden pool, giving reimbursement to medicine fee in drug stores, changing equity of reimbursement, combining NCMS with public health works to help improve NCDs prevention.
引文
1.生部办公厅.农村改革发展成就：新农合——农民健康”保护伞”.卫生部,2009,3http:/www.moh.gov.cn/publicfies/business/htmlfiles/mohbgt/s3582/200903/39592.htm
2.2009年卫生统计提要,卫生部,http://www.moh.gov.cn/publicfiles//business/htmlfiles/zwgkzt/ptity/digest2009/index.htm l
3.郭家宏.斯里兰卡社会福利制度初探[J].北京师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2001(2)：103-109.
4.卢祖洵,金建强.泰国社区卫生服务的特点及借鉴与启迪[J].中国全科医学,2001,4(3)：201-202.
5.2009年全国新农合实际人均筹资113元参合农民7.59亿人次受益.卫生部新型农村合作医疗研究中心,2009,3,10 http://ccms.org.cn/article.aspx?id=252
6. Wagstaff A, Lindelow M. Can insurance increase financial risk? The curious case of health insurance in China. Journal of Health Economics 2008; 27:990-1005.
7. Zhang LY, Cheng XM, Tolhurst R, Tang S, Liu XY. How effectively can the New Cooperative Medical Scheme reduce catastrophic health expenditure for the poor and non-poor in rural China? Tropical Medicine& International Health 2009, forthcoming.
8.桑新刚,夏琴,杨百团等.从新型合作医疗向全民医疗保险制度变迁的需求[J].中国卫生经济,2009,28(1)：56-57
9.中华人民共和国卫生部疾病预防控制局,中国疾病预防控制中心.中国慢性病报告[R].北京,2006.5
10.梁万年.卫生事业管理学第二版.人民卫生出版社,2008,7,北京
11.李鲁.社会医学第三版.人民卫生出版社,2008,6,北京
12.胡善联.我国新型农村合作医疗制度的运行状况与评价分析[J].中国卫生经济,2008,27(2)：26-27
13.宁永功.制定新型农村合作医疗实施方案的基本策略[J].中国卫生经济,2006,25(10)：30-33.
14.王靖元.论新型农村合作医疗补偿的分类调控[J].卫生经济研究,2006,12：35-36.
15. World Health Organization预防慢病是一项至关重要的投资[DB/OL]. http://www.wpro.who.int/china/media centre/press releases/,2006,5.9.
16.卫生部公布第四次国家卫生服务调查主要结果http://www.moh.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/mohbgt/s3582/200902/39201.htm
17.中华人民共和国卫生部疾病预防控制局,中国疾病预防控制中心.中国慢性病报告[R].北京,2006.5
18.梁万年.卫生事业管理学第一版.人民卫生出版社,2004,7,北京
19.王梅,刘克梅,王德江等.中国脑出血疾病的直接费用负担现状及其问题[J].中国卫生经济,2005,7(24)：43-46
20.胡善联.疾病负担研究(上)[J].卫生经济研究,2005,5：22-27
21.胡善联.疾病负担研究(下)[J].卫生经济研究,2005,6：21-23
22.唐玲,陈兴宝,陈慧云,赵鲁勇,胡善联.中国城市2型糖尿病及其并发症的经济负担[J].中国卫生经济,2003,12(22)：21-23
23.“中国居民营养予健康状况调查报告”.国务院新闻发布会2004,10-12.
24.程灏珠.实用内科学(第11版).北京：人民卫生出版社.1430.
25.李俊亮,李岗,王宁.农村高血压的现状与对策[J].中国社区医师(综合版),2006,20
26.沈洪兵,俞顺章,徐耀初.我国糖尿病的发病和死亡趋势及其疾病负担研究[J]]现代预防医学,1998,25(4)：447-450
27.焉然.关注农村糖尿病减轻疾病经济负担[J].中国初级卫生保健,2006,20(8)：13-14
28. People's Daily Online. China has annual increase of 1.2 million diabetes patients[EB/OL]. http.//english.peopledaily. com.cn/200011/14/eng 20001114_55162.html,2008-02-29.
29. Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, et al. Global prevalence of diabetes:estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030[J]. Diabetes Care,2004,27:1047-1053.
30.王建生,张庆军,金水高.我国高血压和糖尿病的疾病负担分析[J].公共卫生与预防医学,2006,18(3)：27-30.
31.、肖新华.我国糖尿病发病的严峻形势及应对措施[J].医学研究杂志,2006,36(4)：9-10.
32.贾恩志,徐耀初,沈洪兵,周玲,喻荣彬.疾病的经济负担及其评价方法[J].江苏预防医学,1999,10(3)：2-3.
33.于保荣, 褚金花, 高静, 宫习飞.描述中低收入国家疾病经济风险的指标综述[J]. 中国卫生经济,2009,29(5)：66-68.
34. Xu K, Klavus J, Kawabata K, et al. Household health system contributions and capacity to pay:definitional, empirical and technical challenges. In:Murray CJL, Evans DB, eds. Health systems performance assessment:debate, new methods and new empiricism. Geneva:World Health Organization(in press).
35. Winnie Yip, William C. Hsiao. Non-evidence-based policy:How effective is China's new cooperative medical scheme in reducing medical impoverishment? Social science and medicine,2009,68:201-209
36. Wagstaff A, Lindelow M. Can insurance increase financial risk? The curious case of health insurance in China[R]. The World Bank USA,2005.
37.汲进梅,农村慢性非传染性疾病控制机制研究[D],山东大学,2009,5
38. Xiao Yun Sun, Sukhan Jackson, Gordon Crmichel and Adrian C. Sleigh. Catastrophic Medical Payment and Financial Protection in Rural China:Evidence from the New Cooperative Medical Scheme in Shandong Province [J]. Health Economics,2009,18: 103-119.
39.济宁市卫生局,济宁市关于调整新农合报销标准的通知,2008,7.
40.陈迎春,徐锡武,王曹,张宏涛,吴妮娜,王莉阳,罗五金,汪早立.新型农村合作医疗减缓“因病致贫”效果测量[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(8)：26-28.
41.郝模,丁晓沧,罗力,等.农村居民疾病经济风险测定方法及意义[J].中国初级卫生保健,1997,11(10)：17-18.
42.尹爱田,刘永强,王垚,魏薇,俞水.农村慢性病病人家庭的疾病经济风险分析[J].卫生经济研究,2006,12：14-16.
43.井珊珊,刘晓云,孟庆跃,严非,于保荣,尹爱田.农村慢性病病人家庭疾病经济风险的比较研究[J].中国卫生事业管理,2009,2：76-80.
44.崔欣,罗力, 李春芳,蔡琳, 潘迎冰, 宋明山,陈政, 张黎明,王东,郝模.新型农村合作医疗降低就医经济风险的作用[J].中国卫生资源,2005,8(60：253-255.
45.王建生,张庆军,金水高.我国高血压和糖尿病的疾病负担分析.公共卫生与预防医学2006；18(003)：27-30.
46.魏颖,杜乐勋.卫生经济学与卫生事业管理[M].人民卫生山版社,1998,北京.
47. Devadasan N, Criel B, Van Damme W, et al. Indian community health insurance schemes provide partial protection against catastrophic health expenditure. BMC Health Services Research,2006.
48. Ranson MK. The SEWA Medical Insurance Fund in India. Health Financing for Poor People,2004,275-292.
49. Ranson MK. Reduction of catastrophic health care expenditures by a community-based health insurance scheme in Gujarat, India:current experiences and challenges. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.2002,80(8):613-621.
50. David Mark Dror, Ruth Koren, David Mark Steinberg. The impact of filipino micro healthinsurance units on income-related equality of access to healthcare. Health Policy, 2006,77:304-317.
51. Diop F, Yazbeck A, Bitran R. The impact of alternative cost recovery schemes on access and equity in Niger. Health Policy Plan,1995,10(3):223-240.
52. Derriennic Y, Wolf K, Kiwanuka-Mukiibi P. An Assessment of Community-Based Health Financing Activities in Uganda. The Partners for Health Reform plus Project (PHRpius), 2005.
53. Jutting JP. Financial Protection and Access to Health Care in Rural Areas of Senegal. Health Financing for Poor People—Resource Mobilization and Risk Sharing,2004, chapter6:232-247.
54. Asfaw A, Jutting JP. The Role of Health Insurance in Poverty Reduction:Empirical Evidence From Senegal. Intl Journal of Public Administration,2006, (30):835-858.
55. Sulzbach S, Garshong B, Owusu-Banahene G. Evaluating the Effects of the National Health Insurance Act in Ghana. Baseline Report. Partners for Health Reform plus,2005.
56. Ruiz F, Amaya L, Venegas S. Progressive segmented health insurance:Colombian health reform and access to health services. Health Econmy,2006,16:3-18.
57. Habichi J, Xu K, Couffinhal A, et al. Detecting changes in financial protection:creating evidence for policy in Estonia. Health Policy and Planning,2006,21(6):421-431
58. Adam Wagstaf& Shengchao Yu. Do health sector reforms have their intended impacts? The World Bank's Health VIII project in Gansu province, China. Journal of Health Economics,2006,26:505-535
59. Deaton A, Muellbauer J. Economics and consumer behavior. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1980.
60. Ke Xu, David B Evans, Kei Kawabata, Riadh Zeramdini, Jan Klavus, Christopher J L Murray. Household catastrophic health expenditure:a multicountry analysis. THE LANCET.2003,362:111-117.
61. Chen, S.,& Ravallion, M. (2004). How have the world's poorest fared since the early 1980s? World Bank Research Observer,19,141-169.
62. van Doorslaer, E., O'Donnell, O., Rannan-Eliya, R. P., Somanathan, A., Adhikari, S. R., Garg, C.C., et al. (2006). Effect of payments for health care on poverty estimates in 11 countries in Asia:an analysis of household survey data. Lancet,368,1357-1364.
63. Ravallion, M., Datt, G.,& van de Walle, D. (1991). Quantifying absolute poverty in the developing world. Review of Income and Wealth,37,345-361.
64. BJORN EKMAN. Community-based health insurance in low-income countries:a systematic review of the evidence. Health policy and planning,2004,19(5):249-270
65.李晓燕.从健康水平、服务利用和筹资视角看新农合制度公平性——基于黑龙江省的实证分析[J],中国人口科学,2009第3期,P96-103
66.李洁,王永辉.江苏省新型农村合作医疗补偿问题分析[J]南京中医药大学学报(社会科学版),2008,9(1)：45-49.
67.郝潇,袁兆康,兰希林,涂永红,肖云昌,俞慧强,刘勇,洪鹰,陈尚文.江西省新农合两种门诊补偿模式的比较分析[J].中国社会医学杂志,2009,27(4)：244-246.
68.左延莉,胡善联,刘宝,江芹.新型农村合作医疗门诊统筹模式与家庭账户模式的比较研究[J].中国卫生经济,2006,12(25)：19-21.
69.赵丽华,申俊霞.新型农村合作医疗中几种补偿模式的比较及建议[J].中国药业,2008,17(10)：2.
70.王燕秋,黄兴黎.云南省新型农村合作医疗三种门诊减免模式的对比分析[J].中国初级卫生保健,2006,21(9)：10-11.
71.张英洁.新型农村合作医疗统筹补偿方案研究[D].山东大学,2009,7.
72.张翼.如何让“新农合”更好的保障农村贫困群体[J].北京工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,8(4)：1-9.
73.田庆丰,李小芳,李中琳.新型农村合作医疗的受益公平性研究[J].医学与哲学(人 文社会医学版),2006,27(8)：8-10.
74.焦岩.新型农村合作医疗收益分布研究[D].山东大学,2006,7.
75.徐立柱.新型合作医疗制度下参合农民受益公平性研究[D].山东大学,2006,7.
76.汪宏,Winnie Yip,张里程,王禄生,萧庆伦.中国农村合作医疗的受益公平性[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(2)：16-19.
77.褚金花,于保荣,孟庆跃,严非,Tolhurst Rachel新型农村合作医疗对山东和宁夏农村居民卫生服务公平性影响研究[J].中国卫生经济,2009,29(6)：28-30.
78.成昌慧.新型农村合作医疗制度需方公平性研究[D].山东大学,2008,7.
79.孟庆跃,焦岩,于保荣,严非,汤胜蓝.山东、宁夏新型农村合作医疗不同收入人群受益分布研究[J].中国卫生经济,2008,27(11)：41-43.
80.宫习飞,于保荣,孟庆跃,严非,Tolhurst Rachel新型农村合作医疗对灾难性卫生支出的影响研究[J].卫生经济研究,2009,9：27-29.
81.宫习飞,于保荣,孟庆跃,严非,Dobberschuetz Karin, Tolhurst Rachel新型农村合作医疗受益率和实际补偿比的实例研究[J].卫生经济研究,2009,4：38-39.
82.李林贵.山东省新型农村合作医疗评价研究[D].山东大学,2006,,7
83.李颖琰,王禄生,杜进林,吴建.新型农村合作医疗综合评价指标体系研究阶段报告[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(5)：13-16.
84.胡善联.全国农村新型农村合作医疗的评价.卫生部交流材料.2004.12.16
85.罗力.新型农村合作医疗模式系统评价研究(浙江).卫生部交流材料.2004.12.1
86.卢祖洵.社会医疗保险学[M],人民卫生山版社,北京,2003,12.
87. Qian D, Pong RW, Yin A, Nagarajan KV, Meng Q:Determinants of health care demand in poor, rural China:the case of Gansu Province. Health Policy Plan 2009,24(5):324-334.
88.汤质如等.安徽省肥西县新型农村合作医疗研究(二).中国卫生经济,2004,23(12)：15.16
89.“中国居民营养予健康状况调查报告”.国务院新闻发布会2004,10-12.
90.程灏珠.实用内科学(第11版).北京：人民卫生山版社.1430.
91.吴宏.办好新型农村合作医疗强化三级网建设推动农村卫生事业发展[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2005,25(4)：17-20.
92.夏冕.试论新型农村合作医疗基金的风险控制[J].卫生经济研究,2005,10：16-17.
93.左延莉,胡善联,傅卫,江芹.2004年中国新型农村合作医疗参合率分析[J].卫生软科学,2006,20(4)：342-346.
94.卫生部心血管病防治研究中心.中国心血管病报告2005.中国大百科全书出版社,2006年11月版.
95.王红霞,梁秀芬,张玉敏.我国2型糖尿病的流行病学记危险性因素研究[J].内蒙古医学杂志,2006,38(2)：156-159.
96.肖伟丽.我国居民自我药疗现状分析及对策研究[J].医学与社会杂志,2005,18(12)：17.
97. Sherman Folland, Allen C. Goodman, Miron Stano,(海闻,王健,于保荣译)The economics of health and health care(fifth edition),中国人民大学出版社,2009,8
98.程晓明,罗五金.卫生经济学(第二版),人民卫生出版社,2006,7
99.钱东福.农村患者就医选择行为研究[D].山东大学博士论文,2008,7.
100.肖伟丽.我国居民自我药疗现状分析及对策研究[J].医学与社会杂志,2005；18(12)：17
101. 桑新刚,殷悦,阴佳,尹爱田.促进居民合理用药-需方的角度[J].中国卫生事业管理,2009,11(27)：744-746
102. 李雅媛,杜雪平,韩玲.评价社区高血压病人血压控制和治疗费用[J].中国全科医学,2003,6(6)：476-478.
103. 于保荣,王维夫,李友卫等.典型国家卫生保健制度的保障对象与筹资来源研究[J].中国卫生质量管理,2007,15(4)：8-10.
104. 唐玲,陈兴宝,陈慧云,等.中国城市Ⅱ型糖尿病及其并发症的经济负担[J].中国卫生经济,2003,12(22)：21-23.
105. 袁兆康等.新型农村合作医疗制度对农民医疗费用的影响研究.中国卫生事业管理,2005,25(5)11.14.
106. 李和森等.中国农村医疗保障制度研究,山东省科学技术发展计划(软科学部分)项目报告,2005,5.
107.闫菊娥,高建民,周忠良.陕西省新型农村合作医疗缓解“因病致贫”效果研究[J].中国卫生经济,2009,28(4)：59-61.
108. 王冬.上海市嘉定区新型农村合作医疗制度评价研究[D].复旦大学硕士论文,2009,5.
109. 卫生部统计信息中心：《中国新型农村合作医疗进展及其效果研究》,中国协和医科大学出版社2006年版。
110. 新型农村合作医疗试点工作评估组编：《发展中的中国新型农村合作医疗》,人民卫生出版社2006年版
111. 夏迎秋,景鑫亮,王昊.新农合筹资标准调整后的补偿方案设计思考[J].中国卫生政策研究,2009,3(6)：44-48.
112. 于卉兰,张乐柱.新农合：实施绩效、发展制约与制度改进路径[J].华南农业大学学报(社会科学版),2009,8(3)：54-61.
113. Sun X, Sukhan J, Gordon C, Adrian CS:Catastrophic medical payment and financial protection in rural China:evidence from the New Cooperative Medical Scheme in Shandong Province. Health Economics 2009,18(1):103-119.
114. Meng Q, Yu B, Chu J, Liu X, Bogg L, Dobberschuetz K, Yan F, Tang S, Tolhurst R. Changing equity in China's New Cooperative Medical Scheme:a repeated cross-sectional study in tow provinces
115. 马安宁.关于新农合功能“拐点”假说的理论探讨[J].中国卫生经济,2006,26(1)：41-43.
116. 王奉香,王健,刘彩,姜日进,张建青,于保荣,Tatyana糖尿病纳入社区医保支付研究：青岛实例分析[J].中国卫生经济,2009,28(12)：58-60.
117. 李晓梅,罗家洪,喻箴等.云南省新型农村合作医疗试点县农民慢性病患病情况及影响因素分析.中国全科医学.2006,9(1)：53-55
118. 尹爱田,俞水,魏薇等.农村居民慢性病门诊费用纳入大病统筹基金管理模式及策略.卫生经济研究.2006,12：23-25
119. 李晓燕.从健康水平、服务利用和筹资视角看新农合制度公平性——基于黑龙江省的实证分析[J],中国人口科学,2009第3期,P96-103.
120. 赵郁馨,张毓辉,唐景霞,王丽,万泉,陶四海.卫生服务利用公平性案例研究[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(7)：5-7.
121. 王卫忠.实施新型农村合作医疗前后农村居民卫生服务利用公平性比较研究[J].中国卫生事业管理,2008,2：111-113.
122. 于永红,刘英伟,李斌.卫生筹资不公平性探究[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(6)：27-30.
123. 桑新刚,夏芹,杨百团,尹爱田.从合作医疗制度想医疗保险制度变迁的条什[J],中国卫生经济,2009,28(12)：23-24.
124. 徐润龙,叶真,曾国经.浙汀省三省新型农村合作医疗方案对解决“因病致贫”问题的作用评价[J],中国卫生经济,2006,25(4)：36-37.
125. 邵海亚,孟国祥.新型农村合作医疗补偿模式现状分析[J],医学与哲学,2006,27(2)：35-37.
126. 周晓媛,毛正中,蒋家林,张引颖.对新型农村合作医疗补偿方案中起付线的探讨[J].中国卫生经济,2008,27(1)：47-49.
127. Qian D, Yin A, Song C, Cheng Y:The analysis of involving the outpatient expenditure of chronic diseases into the risk pooling:Chinese health management,2006, 225(3):194-197.
128. 干燕.山东省新型农村合作医疗补偿机制研究[D], 山东大学,2006,5.
129. Liu Y. Development of the rural health insurance system in China. Health Policy and Planning 2004,19:159-65.
130. 付连国,薛塞峰,阮越胜,郭忠琴.新型农村合作医疗住院补偿流向分析[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2009,29(3)：169-172.
131. You Xuedan, Yasuki Kobayashi. The new cooperative medical scheme in China[J]. Health Policy,2009,91:1-9.
132. 毛正中,蒋家林.新型农村合作医疗制度的特征及目前面临的挑战[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(1)：14-15.
133. 魏哲铭,胡登兵,邢莉.新型农村合作医疗门诊统筹制度研究综述[J].理论导刊,2009,2：102-104.
134. 贺鹭,郑建中,韩颖.山西省新型农村合作医疗家庭筹资公平性分析[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2006,26(11)：3-6.
135. 张广科.新型农村合作医疗制度保障能力及其建设建议[J].财政研究,2008,10：72-74.
136. 于春贤,李中义.新型农村合作医疗的绩效分析与对策[J].经济视角,2009,4：56-59.
137. 左延莉,胡善联,刘宝,江芹.新型农村合作医疗门诊补偿模式对卫生服务利用 和管理方式的影响[J].卫生经济研究,2008,2：18-20.
138. 阿不都克里木,阿依古丽,瞿群.新疆新型农村合作医疗“分级、分段计算,累加支付”测算办法研究[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2005,11：9-11
139. 田庆丰,雷卫河,刘新奎,孙亮.新型农村合作医疗试点县农民医疗费用分析和补偿比例测算[J].郑州大学学报,2005,40(5)：848-850.
140. 周盛虎,王旭丹,段红,王建.新农村合作医疗的需求分析与补偿方案研究[J].时代金融,2006,8：123-125
141. 郑振佺,潘宝骏,林娟.新型农村合作医疗补偿方案测算活模版的首创研制[J].海峡预防医学杂志,2006,13(3)：1-4.
142. 童峰,吴建军,徐润龙等.新型农村合作医疗制度筹资与补偿最优方案的Monte Carlo模拟设计,中国卫生统计,2008,25(4)：373-376.
143. 李珍,王平.新型农村合作医疗的社会保险学分析[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2009,9,(3)：8-13.
144. 王卫忠.桐乡市实施新型农村合作医疗前后农村居民住院服务利用比较研究[J].中国初级卫生保健,2006,21(9)：12-14.
145. 袁兆康,方丽霖,周小军,肖云昌,洪鹰,程红亮,汪金福.新型农村合作医疗对农民医疗服务需要与利用影响的追踪调查[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2006,26(10)：14-17.
146. 张体华,田庆丰.新型农村合作医疗对郑州市农民就医行为的影响[J].中国医药导报,2006,4(28)：105-106.
147. 李晓梅,罗家洪,何利平,喻箴,孟琼,毛勇.云南省新型农村合作医疗试点县农民门诊服务利用分析[J].卫生软科学,2006,20(2)：84-86.101,103
148. Liu J, Xu L, Cao X, Wang X, Sun H, Tang C, Yang Z, Song X, Lv M. Analysis of satisfaction about new cooperative medical scheme and its influencing factors in Weihai, China.Detail Only Available[J]. Health policy,2008,86 (2-3):239-44
149. 高长军.医院预测工具—德尔菲法[J].当代医学,2004,10(9)：29
150. 杨树勤,李良军.补充医疗保险保费测算方法研究[J].中国卫生统计,2000,17(1)：2-4
151. 李娟.山东、宁夏农村慢性病患者的患病、就医行为及疾病经济负担研究[D].山 东人学,2008.7.
152. 雷海潮,刘兴柱,卞鹰,等.慢性病患病率上升原因的定量分析.中国卫生经济,1996,15(10)：13-14.
153. Doorslaer Ev, O'Donnell O, Rannan-Eliya RP, Somanathan A, Adhikari SR, Garg CC, Harbianto D, Herrin AN, Huq MN, Ibragimova S et al:Paying out-of-pocket for health care in Asia:catastrophic and poverty impact.2005, EQUITAP Project:working Paper#2
154. Wagstaff A, Doorslaer Ev:Catastrophe and impoverishment in paying for health care: with applications to Vietnam 1993-1998. Health Economics 2003,12(11):921-933.
155. Knaul FM, Arreola-Ornelas H, Mendez-Carniado O, Miranda-Munoz M:Preventing impoverishment, promoting equity and protecting households from financial crisis: universal health insurance through institutional reform in Mexico. Mexico:Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica; 2006.
156. 程艳敏.农村居民慢性病门诊费用纳入大病统筹的可行性研究[D].山东大学,2006,6
157. 饶克勤,尹力,刘远立.中国居民健康转型、卫生服务需求变化及其对经济社会发展的影响.中国卫生经济,2000,19(9)：5-11.
158. 杨哲,张寿生.居民就医行为的影响因索和医疗体质改革.卫生软科学,2000,14(3)：127-130.
159. 张新平,郑光荣.农村居民自购药物行为的影响因素分析.卫生软科学,1999,13(1)：127-130.
160. 毛磊.英国互为补充的医疗保障系统[J].暸望.新闻周刊,1998(41)：20-21.
161. 杨惠芳,陈才庚.墨西哥和巴西的农村医疗保险制度及其对中国建立农村新型合作医疗制度的几点启示[J].拉丁美洲研究,2004(5)：50-53.
2.2009年卫生统计提要,卫生部,http://www.moh.gov.cn/publicfiles//business/htmlfiles/zwgkzt/ptity/digest2009/index.htm l
3.郭家宏.斯里兰卡社会福利制度初探[J].北京师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2001(2)：103-109.
4.卢祖洵,金建强.泰国社区卫生服务的特点及借鉴与启迪[J].中国全科医学,2001,4(3)：201-202.
5.2009年全国新农合实际人均筹资113元参合农民7.59亿人次受益.卫生部新型农村合作医疗研究中心,2009,3,10 http://ccms.org.cn/article.aspx?id=252
6. Wagstaff A, Lindelow M. Can insurance increase financial risk? The curious case of health insurance in China. Journal of Health Economics 2008; 27:990-1005.
7. Zhang LY, Cheng XM, Tolhurst R, Tang S, Liu XY. How effectively can the New Cooperative Medical Scheme reduce catastrophic health expenditure for the poor and non-poor in rural China? Tropical Medicine& International Health 2009, forthcoming.
8.桑新刚,夏琴,杨百团等.从新型合作医疗向全民医疗保险制度变迁的需求[J].中国卫生经济,2009,28(1)：56-57
9.中华人民共和国卫生部疾病预防控制局,中国疾病预防控制中心.中国慢性病报告[R].北京,2006.5
10.梁万年.卫生事业管理学第二版.人民卫生出版社,2008,7,北京
11.李鲁.社会医学第三版.人民卫生出版社,2008,6,北京
12.胡善联.我国新型农村合作医疗制度的运行状况与评价分析[J].中国卫生经济,2008,27(2)：26-27
13.宁永功.制定新型农村合作医疗实施方案的基本策略[J].中国卫生经济,2006,25(10)：30-33.
14.王靖元.论新型农村合作医疗补偿的分类调控[J].卫生经济研究,2006,12：35-36.
15. World Health Organization预防慢病是一项至关重要的投资[DB/OL]. http://www.wpro.who.int/china/media centre/press releases/,2006,5.9.
16.卫生部公布第四次国家卫生服务调查主要结果http://www.moh.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/mohbgt/s3582/200902/39201.htm
17.中华人民共和国卫生部疾病预防控制局,中国疾病预防控制中心.中国慢性病报告[R].北京,2006.5
18.梁万年.卫生事业管理学第一版.人民卫生出版社,2004,7,北京
19.王梅,刘克梅,王德江等.中国脑出血疾病的直接费用负担现状及其问题[J].中国卫生经济,2005,7(24)：43-46
20.胡善联.疾病负担研究(上)[J].卫生经济研究,2005,5：22-27
21.胡善联.疾病负担研究(下)[J].卫生经济研究,2005,6：21-23
22.唐玲,陈兴宝,陈慧云,赵鲁勇,胡善联.中国城市2型糖尿病及其并发症的经济负担[J].中国卫生经济,2003,12(22)：21-23
23.“中国居民营养予健康状况调查报告”.国务院新闻发布会2004,10-12.
24.程灏珠.实用内科学(第11版).北京：人民卫生出版社.1430.
25.李俊亮,李岗,王宁.农村高血压的现状与对策[J].中国社区医师(综合版),2006,20
26.沈洪兵,俞顺章,徐耀初.我国糖尿病的发病和死亡趋势及其疾病负担研究[J]]现代预防医学,1998,25(4)：447-450
27.焉然.关注农村糖尿病减轻疾病经济负担[J].中国初级卫生保健,2006,20(8)：13-14
28. People's Daily Online. China has annual increase of 1.2 million diabetes patients[EB/OL]. http.//english.peopledaily. com.cn/200011/14/eng 20001114_55162.html,2008-02-29.
29. Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, et al. Global prevalence of diabetes:estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030[J]. Diabetes Care,2004,27:1047-1053.
30.王建生,张庆军,金水高.我国高血压和糖尿病的疾病负担分析[J].公共卫生与预防医学,2006,18(3)：27-30.
31.、肖新华.我国糖尿病发病的严峻形势及应对措施[J].医学研究杂志,2006,36(4)：9-10.
32.贾恩志,徐耀初,沈洪兵,周玲,喻荣彬.疾病的经济负担及其评价方法[J].江苏预防医学,1999,10(3)：2-3.
33.于保荣, 褚金花, 高静, 宫习飞.描述中低收入国家疾病经济风险的指标综述[J]. 中国卫生经济,2009,29(5)：66-68.
34. Xu K, Klavus J, Kawabata K, et al. Household health system contributions and capacity to pay:definitional, empirical and technical challenges. In:Murray CJL, Evans DB, eds. Health systems performance assessment:debate, new methods and new empiricism. Geneva:World Health Organization(in press).
35. Winnie Yip, William C. Hsiao. Non-evidence-based policy:How effective is China's new cooperative medical scheme in reducing medical impoverishment? Social science and medicine,2009,68:201-209
36. Wagstaff A, Lindelow M. Can insurance increase financial risk? The curious case of health insurance in China[R]. The World Bank USA,2005.
37.汲进梅,农村慢性非传染性疾病控制机制研究[D],山东大学,2009,5
38. Xiao Yun Sun, Sukhan Jackson, Gordon Crmichel and Adrian C. Sleigh. Catastrophic Medical Payment and Financial Protection in Rural China:Evidence from the New Cooperative Medical Scheme in Shandong Province [J]. Health Economics,2009,18: 103-119.
39.济宁市卫生局,济宁市关于调整新农合报销标准的通知,2008,7.
40.陈迎春,徐锡武,王曹,张宏涛,吴妮娜,王莉阳,罗五金,汪早立.新型农村合作医疗减缓“因病致贫”效果测量[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(8)：26-28.
41.郝模,丁晓沧,罗力,等.农村居民疾病经济风险测定方法及意义[J].中国初级卫生保健,1997,11(10)：17-18.
42.尹爱田,刘永强,王垚,魏薇,俞水.农村慢性病病人家庭的疾病经济风险分析[J].卫生经济研究,2006,12：14-16.
43.井珊珊,刘晓云,孟庆跃,严非,于保荣,尹爱田.农村慢性病病人家庭疾病经济风险的比较研究[J].中国卫生事业管理,2009,2：76-80.
44.崔欣,罗力, 李春芳,蔡琳, 潘迎冰, 宋明山,陈政, 张黎明,王东,郝模.新型农村合作医疗降低就医经济风险的作用[J].中国卫生资源,2005,8(60：253-255.
45.王建生,张庆军,金水高.我国高血压和糖尿病的疾病负担分析.公共卫生与预防医学2006；18(003)：27-30.
46.魏颖,杜乐勋.卫生经济学与卫生事业管理[M].人民卫生山版社,1998,北京.
47. Devadasan N, Criel B, Van Damme W, et al. Indian community health insurance schemes provide partial protection against catastrophic health expenditure. BMC Health Services Research,2006.
48. Ranson MK. The SEWA Medical Insurance Fund in India. Health Financing for Poor People,2004,275-292.
49. Ranson MK. Reduction of catastrophic health care expenditures by a community-based health insurance scheme in Gujarat, India:current experiences and challenges. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.2002,80(8):613-621.
50. David Mark Dror, Ruth Koren, David Mark Steinberg. The impact of filipino micro healthinsurance units on income-related equality of access to healthcare. Health Policy, 2006,77:304-317.
51. Diop F, Yazbeck A, Bitran R. The impact of alternative cost recovery schemes on access and equity in Niger. Health Policy Plan,1995,10(3):223-240.
52. Derriennic Y, Wolf K, Kiwanuka-Mukiibi P. An Assessment of Community-Based Health Financing Activities in Uganda. The Partners for Health Reform plus Project (PHRpius), 2005.
53. Jutting JP. Financial Protection and Access to Health Care in Rural Areas of Senegal. Health Financing for Poor People—Resource Mobilization and Risk Sharing,2004, chapter6:232-247.
54. Asfaw A, Jutting JP. The Role of Health Insurance in Poverty Reduction:Empirical Evidence From Senegal. Intl Journal of Public Administration,2006, (30):835-858.
55. Sulzbach S, Garshong B, Owusu-Banahene G. Evaluating the Effects of the National Health Insurance Act in Ghana. Baseline Report. Partners for Health Reform plus,2005.
56. Ruiz F, Amaya L, Venegas S. Progressive segmented health insurance:Colombian health reform and access to health services. Health Econmy,2006,16:3-18.
57. Habichi J, Xu K, Couffinhal A, et al. Detecting changes in financial protection:creating evidence for policy in Estonia. Health Policy and Planning,2006,21(6):421-431
58. Adam Wagstaf& Shengchao Yu. Do health sector reforms have their intended impacts? The World Bank's Health VIII project in Gansu province, China. Journal of Health Economics,2006,26:505-535
59. Deaton A, Muellbauer J. Economics and consumer behavior. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1980.
60. Ke Xu, David B Evans, Kei Kawabata, Riadh Zeramdini, Jan Klavus, Christopher J L Murray. Household catastrophic health expenditure:a multicountry analysis. THE LANCET.2003,362:111-117.
61. Chen, S.,& Ravallion, M. (2004). How have the world's poorest fared since the early 1980s? World Bank Research Observer,19,141-169.
62. van Doorslaer, E., O'Donnell, O., Rannan-Eliya, R. P., Somanathan, A., Adhikari, S. R., Garg, C.C., et al. (2006). Effect of payments for health care on poverty estimates in 11 countries in Asia:an analysis of household survey data. Lancet,368,1357-1364.
63. Ravallion, M., Datt, G.,& van de Walle, D. (1991). Quantifying absolute poverty in the developing world. Review of Income and Wealth,37,345-361.
64. BJORN EKMAN. Community-based health insurance in low-income countries:a systematic review of the evidence. Health policy and planning,2004,19(5):249-270
65.李晓燕.从健康水平、服务利用和筹资视角看新农合制度公平性——基于黑龙江省的实证分析[J],中国人口科学,2009第3期,P96-103
66.李洁,王永辉.江苏省新型农村合作医疗补偿问题分析[J]南京中医药大学学报(社会科学版),2008,9(1)：45-49.
67.郝潇,袁兆康,兰希林,涂永红,肖云昌,俞慧强,刘勇,洪鹰,陈尚文.江西省新农合两种门诊补偿模式的比较分析[J].中国社会医学杂志,2009,27(4)：244-246.
68.左延莉,胡善联,刘宝,江芹.新型农村合作医疗门诊统筹模式与家庭账户模式的比较研究[J].中国卫生经济,2006,12(25)：19-21.
69.赵丽华,申俊霞.新型农村合作医疗中几种补偿模式的比较及建议[J].中国药业,2008,17(10)：2.
70.王燕秋,黄兴黎.云南省新型农村合作医疗三种门诊减免模式的对比分析[J].中国初级卫生保健,2006,21(9)：10-11.
71.张英洁.新型农村合作医疗统筹补偿方案研究[D].山东大学,2009,7.
72.张翼.如何让“新农合”更好的保障农村贫困群体[J].北京工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,8(4)：1-9.
73.田庆丰,李小芳,李中琳.新型农村合作医疗的受益公平性研究[J].医学与哲学(人 文社会医学版),2006,27(8)：8-10.
74.焦岩.新型农村合作医疗收益分布研究[D].山东大学,2006,7.
75.徐立柱.新型合作医疗制度下参合农民受益公平性研究[D].山东大学,2006,7.
76.汪宏,Winnie Yip,张里程,王禄生,萧庆伦.中国农村合作医疗的受益公平性[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(2)：16-19.
77.褚金花,于保荣,孟庆跃,严非,Tolhurst Rachel新型农村合作医疗对山东和宁夏农村居民卫生服务公平性影响研究[J].中国卫生经济,2009,29(6)：28-30.
78.成昌慧.新型农村合作医疗制度需方公平性研究[D].山东大学,2008,7.
79.孟庆跃,焦岩,于保荣,严非,汤胜蓝.山东、宁夏新型农村合作医疗不同收入人群受益分布研究[J].中国卫生经济,2008,27(11)：41-43.
80.宫习飞,于保荣,孟庆跃,严非,Tolhurst Rachel新型农村合作医疗对灾难性卫生支出的影响研究[J].卫生经济研究,2009,9：27-29.
81.宫习飞,于保荣,孟庆跃,严非,Dobberschuetz Karin, Tolhurst Rachel新型农村合作医疗受益率和实际补偿比的实例研究[J].卫生经济研究,2009,4：38-39.
82.李林贵.山东省新型农村合作医疗评价研究[D].山东大学,2006,,7
83.李颖琰,王禄生,杜进林,吴建.新型农村合作医疗综合评价指标体系研究阶段报告[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(5)：13-16.
84.胡善联.全国农村新型农村合作医疗的评价.卫生部交流材料.2004.12.16
85.罗力.新型农村合作医疗模式系统评价研究(浙江).卫生部交流材料.2004.12.1
86.卢祖洵.社会医疗保险学[M],人民卫生山版社,北京,2003,12.
87. Qian D, Pong RW, Yin A, Nagarajan KV, Meng Q:Determinants of health care demand in poor, rural China:the case of Gansu Province. Health Policy Plan 2009,24(5):324-334.
88.汤质如等.安徽省肥西县新型农村合作医疗研究(二).中国卫生经济,2004,23(12)：15.16
89.“中国居民营养予健康状况调查报告”.国务院新闻发布会2004,10-12.
90.程灏珠.实用内科学(第11版).北京：人民卫生山版社.1430.
91.吴宏.办好新型农村合作医疗强化三级网建设推动农村卫生事业发展[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2005,25(4)：17-20.
92.夏冕.试论新型农村合作医疗基金的风险控制[J].卫生经济研究,2005,10：16-17.
93.左延莉,胡善联,傅卫,江芹.2004年中国新型农村合作医疗参合率分析[J].卫生软科学,2006,20(4)：342-346.
94.卫生部心血管病防治研究中心.中国心血管病报告2005.中国大百科全书出版社,2006年11月版.
95.王红霞,梁秀芬,张玉敏.我国2型糖尿病的流行病学记危险性因素研究[J].内蒙古医学杂志,2006,38(2)：156-159.
96.肖伟丽.我国居民自我药疗现状分析及对策研究[J].医学与社会杂志,2005,18(12)：17.
97. Sherman Folland, Allen C. Goodman, Miron Stano,(海闻,王健,于保荣译)The economics of health and health care(fifth edition),中国人民大学出版社,2009,8
98.程晓明,罗五金.卫生经济学(第二版),人民卫生出版社,2006,7
99.钱东福.农村患者就医选择行为研究[D].山东大学博士论文,2008,7.
100.肖伟丽.我国居民自我药疗现状分析及对策研究[J].医学与社会杂志,2005；18(12)：17
101. 桑新刚,殷悦,阴佳,尹爱田.促进居民合理用药-需方的角度[J].中国卫生事业管理,2009,11(27)：744-746
102. 李雅媛,杜雪平,韩玲.评价社区高血压病人血压控制和治疗费用[J].中国全科医学,2003,6(6)：476-478.
103. 于保荣,王维夫,李友卫等.典型国家卫生保健制度的保障对象与筹资来源研究[J].中国卫生质量管理,2007,15(4)：8-10.
104. 唐玲,陈兴宝,陈慧云,等.中国城市Ⅱ型糖尿病及其并发症的经济负担[J].中国卫生经济,2003,12(22)：21-23.
105. 袁兆康等.新型农村合作医疗制度对农民医疗费用的影响研究.中国卫生事业管理,2005,25(5)11.14.
106. 李和森等.中国农村医疗保障制度研究,山东省科学技术发展计划(软科学部分)项目报告,2005,5.
107.闫菊娥,高建民,周忠良.陕西省新型农村合作医疗缓解“因病致贫”效果研究[J].中国卫生经济,2009,28(4)：59-61.
108. 王冬.上海市嘉定区新型农村合作医疗制度评价研究[D].复旦大学硕士论文,2009,5.
109. 卫生部统计信息中心：《中国新型农村合作医疗进展及其效果研究》,中国协和医科大学出版社2006年版。
110. 新型农村合作医疗试点工作评估组编：《发展中的中国新型农村合作医疗》,人民卫生出版社2006年版
111. 夏迎秋,景鑫亮,王昊.新农合筹资标准调整后的补偿方案设计思考[J].中国卫生政策研究,2009,3(6)：44-48.
112. 于卉兰,张乐柱.新农合：实施绩效、发展制约与制度改进路径[J].华南农业大学学报(社会科学版),2009,8(3)：54-61.
113. Sun X, Sukhan J, Gordon C, Adrian CS:Catastrophic medical payment and financial protection in rural China:evidence from the New Cooperative Medical Scheme in Shandong Province. Health Economics 2009,18(1):103-119.
114. Meng Q, Yu B, Chu J, Liu X, Bogg L, Dobberschuetz K, Yan F, Tang S, Tolhurst R. Changing equity in China's New Cooperative Medical Scheme:a repeated cross-sectional study in tow provinces
115. 马安宁.关于新农合功能“拐点”假说的理论探讨[J].中国卫生经济,2006,26(1)：41-43.
116. 王奉香,王健,刘彩,姜日进,张建青,于保荣,Tatyana糖尿病纳入社区医保支付研究：青岛实例分析[J].中国卫生经济,2009,28(12)：58-60.
117. 李晓梅,罗家洪,喻箴等.云南省新型农村合作医疗试点县农民慢性病患病情况及影响因素分析.中国全科医学.2006,9(1)：53-55
118. 尹爱田,俞水,魏薇等.农村居民慢性病门诊费用纳入大病统筹基金管理模式及策略.卫生经济研究.2006,12：23-25
119. 李晓燕.从健康水平、服务利用和筹资视角看新农合制度公平性——基于黑龙江省的实证分析[J],中国人口科学,2009第3期,P96-103.
120. 赵郁馨,张毓辉,唐景霞,王丽,万泉,陶四海.卫生服务利用公平性案例研究[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(7)：5-7.
121. 王卫忠.实施新型农村合作医疗前后农村居民卫生服务利用公平性比较研究[J].中国卫生事业管理,2008,2：111-113.
122. 于永红,刘英伟,李斌.卫生筹资不公平性探究[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(6)：27-30.
123. 桑新刚,夏芹,杨百团,尹爱田.从合作医疗制度想医疗保险制度变迁的条什[J],中国卫生经济,2009,28(12)：23-24.
124. 徐润龙,叶真,曾国经.浙汀省三省新型农村合作医疗方案对解决“因病致贫”问题的作用评价[J],中国卫生经济,2006,25(4)：36-37.
125. 邵海亚,孟国祥.新型农村合作医疗补偿模式现状分析[J],医学与哲学,2006,27(2)：35-37.
126. 周晓媛,毛正中,蒋家林,张引颖.对新型农村合作医疗补偿方案中起付线的探讨[J].中国卫生经济,2008,27(1)：47-49.
127. Qian D, Yin A, Song C, Cheng Y:The analysis of involving the outpatient expenditure of chronic diseases into the risk pooling:Chinese health management,2006, 225(3):194-197.
128. 干燕.山东省新型农村合作医疗补偿机制研究[D], 山东大学,2006,5.
129. Liu Y. Development of the rural health insurance system in China. Health Policy and Planning 2004,19:159-65.
130. 付连国,薛塞峰,阮越胜,郭忠琴.新型农村合作医疗住院补偿流向分析[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2009,29(3)：169-172.
131. You Xuedan, Yasuki Kobayashi. The new cooperative medical scheme in China[J]. Health Policy,2009,91:1-9.
132. 毛正中,蒋家林.新型农村合作医疗制度的特征及目前面临的挑战[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(1)：14-15.
133. 魏哲铭,胡登兵,邢莉.新型农村合作医疗门诊统筹制度研究综述[J].理论导刊,2009,2：102-104.
134. 贺鹭,郑建中,韩颖.山西省新型农村合作医疗家庭筹资公平性分析[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2006,26(11)：3-6.
135. 张广科.新型农村合作医疗制度保障能力及其建设建议[J].财政研究,2008,10：72-74.
136. 于春贤,李中义.新型农村合作医疗的绩效分析与对策[J].经济视角,2009,4：56-59.
137. 左延莉,胡善联,刘宝,江芹.新型农村合作医疗门诊补偿模式对卫生服务利用 和管理方式的影响[J].卫生经济研究,2008,2：18-20.
138. 阿不都克里木,阿依古丽,瞿群.新疆新型农村合作医疗“分级、分段计算,累加支付”测算办法研究[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2005,11：9-11
139. 田庆丰,雷卫河,刘新奎,孙亮.新型农村合作医疗试点县农民医疗费用分析和补偿比例测算[J].郑州大学学报,2005,40(5)：848-850.
140. 周盛虎,王旭丹,段红,王建.新农村合作医疗的需求分析与补偿方案研究[J].时代金融,2006,8：123-125
141. 郑振佺,潘宝骏,林娟.新型农村合作医疗补偿方案测算活模版的首创研制[J].海峡预防医学杂志,2006,13(3)：1-4.
142. 童峰,吴建军,徐润龙等.新型农村合作医疗制度筹资与补偿最优方案的Monte Carlo模拟设计,中国卫生统计,2008,25(4)：373-376.
143. 李珍,王平.新型农村合作医疗的社会保险学分析[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2009,9,(3)：8-13.
144. 王卫忠.桐乡市实施新型农村合作医疗前后农村居民住院服务利用比较研究[J].中国初级卫生保健,2006,21(9)：12-14.
145. 袁兆康,方丽霖,周小军,肖云昌,洪鹰,程红亮,汪金福.新型农村合作医疗对农民医疗服务需要与利用影响的追踪调查[J].中国农村卫生事业管理,2006,26(10)：14-17.
146. 张体华,田庆丰.新型农村合作医疗对郑州市农民就医行为的影响[J].中国医药导报,2006,4(28)：105-106.
147. 李晓梅,罗家洪,何利平,喻箴,孟琼,毛勇.云南省新型农村合作医疗试点县农民门诊服务利用分析[J].卫生软科学,2006,20(2)：84-86.101,103
148. Liu J, Xu L, Cao X, Wang X, Sun H, Tang C, Yang Z, Song X, Lv M. Analysis of satisfaction about new cooperative medical scheme and its influencing factors in Weihai, China.Detail Only Available[J]. Health policy,2008,86 (2-3):239-44
149. 高长军.医院预测工具—德尔菲法[J].当代医学,2004,10(9)：29
150. 杨树勤,李良军.补充医疗保险保费测算方法研究[J].中国卫生统计,2000,17(1)：2-4
151. 李娟.山东、宁夏农村慢性病患者的患病、就医行为及疾病经济负担研究[D].山 东人学,2008.7.
152. 雷海潮,刘兴柱,卞鹰,等.慢性病患病率上升原因的定量分析.中国卫生经济,1996,15(10)：13-14.
153. Doorslaer Ev, O'Donnell O, Rannan-Eliya RP, Somanathan A, Adhikari SR, Garg CC, Harbianto D, Herrin AN, Huq MN, Ibragimova S et al:Paying out-of-pocket for health care in Asia:catastrophic and poverty impact.2005, EQUITAP Project:working Paper#2
154. Wagstaff A, Doorslaer Ev:Catastrophe and impoverishment in paying for health care: with applications to Vietnam 1993-1998. Health Economics 2003,12(11):921-933.
155. Knaul FM, Arreola-Ornelas H, Mendez-Carniado O, Miranda-Munoz M:Preventing impoverishment, promoting equity and protecting households from financial crisis: universal health insurance through institutional reform in Mexico. Mexico:Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica; 2006.
156. 程艳敏.农村居民慢性病门诊费用纳入大病统筹的可行性研究[D].山东大学,2006,6
157. 饶克勤,尹力,刘远立.中国居民健康转型、卫生服务需求变化及其对经济社会发展的影响.中国卫生经济,2000,19(9)：5-11.
158. 杨哲,张寿生.居民就医行为的影响因索和医疗体质改革.卫生软科学,2000,14(3)：127-130.
159. 张新平,郑光荣.农村居民自购药物行为的影响因素分析.卫生软科学,1999,13(1)：127-130.
160. 毛磊.英国互为补充的医疗保障系统[J].暸望.新闻周刊,1998(41)：20-21.
161. 杨惠芳,陈才庚.墨西哥和巴西的农村医疗保险制度及其对中国建立农村新型合作医疗制度的几点启示[J].拉丁美洲研究,2004(5)：50-53.