Impact of Government-Funded Health Insurance on Out-of-Pocket Expenditure and Quality of Hospital-Based Care in Indian States of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra.

BACKGROUND: With its clear focus on financial protection, government-funded health insurance (GFHI) stands out among the strategies for universal health coverage (UHC) implemented by low-to-middle income countries globally. Since 2018, India has implemented a GFHI programme called the Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB-PMJAY), which covers 500 million individuals. The current study aims to evaluate the performance of GFHI in meeting its key objectives of improving access, quality and financial protection for hospital-based care in two large central Indian states: Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra.

METHODS: The study measures access in terms of utilisation of inpatient care. Financial protection was measured in terms of catastrophic health expenditure which was defined as the incidence of out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) above thresholds of 10% and 25% of annual household expenditure. Patient-satisfaction with care was taken as an indicator of quality. A household survey was conducted in 2023, covering a multi-stage sample of 11,569 and 12,384 individuals in Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, respectively. Multi-variate analyses were conducted to find the effect of GFHI-enrolment on the desired outcomes. The instrumental variable method was applied to address potential endogeneity in insurance enrolment. Additionally, propensity score matching was done to ensure robustness.

RESULTS: Around 71% and 63% of surveyed individuals were enrolled under GFHI in Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, respectively. The hospitalisation rate did not differ much between the GFHI-enrolled and non-enrolled population. The average OOPE on hospitalisation was similar for the GFHI-enrolled and non-enrolled patients. The OOPE and catastrophic health expenditure in private hospitals remained very high, irrespective of GFHI enrolment. The pattern was similar in both states. Multi-variate adjusted models showed that GFHI had no significant effect on utilisation, quality, OOPE and catastrophic health expenditure. The above results were confirmed by propensity score matching.

CONCLUSIONS: Coverage by GFHI enrolment was ineffective in improving access, quality or financial protection for inpatient hospital care despite 5 years of implementation of the programme. Long-standing supply-side gaps and poor regulation of private providers continue to hamper the effectiveness of GFHI in India.