Table 3.
Multiple regression model analysis of net benefit of inpatient care by types of medical insurance schemes for urban and rural residents
| NRCMS | URBMI | URRBMI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef. | SD | Coef. | SD | Coef. | SD | |
| Gender, ref.: Male | 0.21** | 0.09 | 0.09*** | 0.01 | 0.06* | 0.04 |
| Age, ref.:≤44 | ||||||
| 45–59 | 0.07 | 0.11 | −0.08 | 0.14 | −0.03* | 0.02 |
| ≥ 60 | 0.31*** | 0.04 | 0.18** | 0.09 | 0.17* | 0.09 |
| Marital status, ref.: married | −0.41*** | 0.08 | −0.29*** | 0.06 | −0.17*** | 0.02 |
| Employment/retirement status, ref.: employment | ||||||
| Retirement | 0.44 | 0.46 | 0.28** | 0.14 | −0.31 | 0.29 |
| Unemployment or student | −0.13 | 0.16 | −0.08 | 0.07 | −0.21 | 0.24 |
| Educational level, ref.: Under primary school | ||||||
| Junior | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.17** | 0.08 | 0.18** | 0.09 |
| High school or above | 0.34*** | 0.07 | 0.48** | 0.23 | 0.44*** | 0.11 |
| Chronic, ref.: No chronic | 1.28*** | 0.04 | 1.34*** | 0.43 | 1.59*** | 0.31 |
| Health status(EQ-VAS: self-reported), ref.: Excellent | ||||||
| Good | 0.23 | 0.35 | 0.43 | 0.51 | 0.37 | 0.31 |
| Medium | 0.77 | 0.68 | 0.92* | 0.48 | 0.65 | 0.57 |
| Poor | 1.26*** | 0.14 | 1.61*** | 0.30 | 1.19*** | 0.21 |
| Very poor | 1.41** | 0.70 | 1.84*** | 0.19 | 1.32** | 0.62 |
| Distance to the medical institution, ref.:< 1 km | 0.03* | 0.02 | −0.04 | 0.06 | −0.07 | 0.11 |
| Willingness to seek inpatient care, ref: Primary care hospital | ||||||
| General hospital or TCM hospital (Traditional Chinese Medicine) | 0.33** | 0.15 | 0.29*** | 0.07 | 0.41*** | 0.08 |
| Per capita income | 0.09*** | 0.01 | 0.03** | 0.01 | 0.02** | 0.01 |
Note: Estimates were weighted using individual sampling weights and adjusted for individual responses
*** implies p-value < 0.01, ** indicates p-value < 0.05, * implies p-value < 0.1