Incidence of catastrophic health spending in Indonesia: insights from a Household Panel Study 2018-2019.

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.

The benefits and burden of health financing in Indonesia: analyses of nationally representative cross-sectional data.

BACKGROUND: Indonesia has committed to deliver universal health coverage by 2024. Reforming the country's health-financing system is key to achieving this commitment. We aimed to evaluate how the benefits and burden of health financing are distributed across income groups and the extent to which Indonesia has achieved equity in the funding and delivery of health care after financing reforms. METHODS: We conducted benefit incidence analyses (BIA) and financing incidence analyses (FIA) using cross-sectional nationally representative data from several datasets. Two waves (Feb 1 to April 30, 2018, and Aug 1 to Oct 31, 2019) of the Equity and Health Care Financing in Indonesia (ENHANCE) study household survey involving 7500 households from ten of the 34 provinces in Indonesia were used to obtain health and socioeconomic status data for the BIA. Two waves (2018 and 2019) of the National Socioeconomic Survey (SUSENAS), the most recent wave (2014) of the Indonesian Family Life Survey, and the 2017 and 2018 National Health Accounts were used to obtain data for the FIA. In the BIA, we calculated a concentration index to assess the distribution of health-care benefits (-1·0 [pro-poor] to 1·0 [pro-rich]), considering potential differences in health-care need. In the FIA, we evaluated the equity of health-financing contributions by socioeconomic quintiles by calculating the Kakwani index to assess the relative progressivity of each financing source. Both the BIA and FIA compared results from early 2018 (baseline) with results from late 2019. FINDINGS: There were 31 864 participants in the ENHANCE survey in 2018 compared with 31 215 in 2019. Women constituted 50·5% and men constituted 49·5% of the total participants for each year. SUSENAS had 1 131 825 participants in 2018 compared with 1 204 466 in 2019. Women constituted 49·9% of the participants for each year, whereas men constituted 51·1%. The distribution of health-care benefits in the public sector was marginally pro-poor; people with low income received a greater proportion of benefits from health services than people with high income between 2018 (concentration index -0·008, 95% CI -0·075 to 0·059) and 2019 (-0·060, -0·139 to 0·019). The benefit incidence in the private health sector was significantly pro-rich in 2018 (0·134, 0·065 to 0·203, p=0·0010) and 2019 (0·190, -0·192 to 0·572, p=0·0070). Health-financing incidence changed from being moderately progressive in 2018 (Kakwani index 0·034, 95% CI 0·030 to 0·038) to mildly regressive in 2019 (-0·030, -0·034 to -0·025). INTERPRETATION: Although Indonesia has made substantial progress in expanding health-care coverage, a lot remains to be done to improve equity in financing and spending. Improving comprehensiveness of benefits will reduce out-of-pocket spending and allocating more funding to primary care would improve access to health-care services for people with low income. FUNDING: UK Health Systems Research Initiative, UK Department of International Development, UK Economic and Social Research Council, UK Medical Research Council, and Wellcome Trust.

Using measures of quality of care to assess equity in health care funding for primary care: analysis of Indonesian household data.

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.

Equity of health financing in Indonesia: A 5-year financing incidence analysis (2015-2019).

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.