RESUMO
Background@#The purpose of this study is to analyze whether there is a change in patterns of medical use among those likely to be converted their health insurance qualifications when the family support rule is alleviated. There is no empirical analysis that converting health insurance qualification will affect the increase in medical use. @*Methods@#For analysis, data were extracted from the national health insurance eligibility and medical care database. To identify analysis targets similar to that of medical aids’ characteristics among health insurance coverage, we compared income, property level, and medical use patterns through basic statistical analysis and used a difference-in-difference (DID) analysis to estimate the net effect of changes in medical use following the change of qualifications. @*Results@#The main results are as follows. The results show that those who are under the 5% income group (1st income group) of health insurance coverage are the most similar to the medical aids group. DID analysis shows that changes in the medical use of people who maintain their national insurance qualification and who are not. As a results, the number of hospitalized days of converting group was reduced by 3.5 days while outpatient days were increased by 1.8 days. @*Conclusion@#As a result, there was not much difference in the patterns of medical use for the under 5% income group who are likely to be eligible for expanded medical aids when the family support rule is alleviated. In addition, more than 30% of them are in arrears with their health insurance premiums, causing inconvenience in using medical services. These findings suggest the need of abolishing the criteria obligated to support family, and great efforts should be made to contribute to non-paid poor and remove their medical blind spot.
RESUMO
Background@#The purpose of this study is to analyze whether there is a change in patterns of medical use among those likely to be converted their health insurance qualifications when the family support rule is alleviated. There is no empirical analysis that converting health insurance qualification will affect the increase in medical use. @*Methods@#For analysis, data were extracted from the national health insurance eligibility and medical care database. To identify analysis targets similar to that of medical aids’ characteristics among health insurance coverage, we compared income, property level, and medical use patterns through basic statistical analysis and used a difference-in-difference (DID) analysis to estimate the net effect of changes in medical use following the change of qualifications. @*Results@#The main results are as follows. The results show that those who are under the 5% income group (1st income group) of health insurance coverage are the most similar to the medical aids group. DID analysis shows that changes in the medical use of people who maintain their national insurance qualification and who are not. As a results, the number of hospitalized days of converting group was reduced by 3.5 days while outpatient days were increased by 1.8 days. @*Conclusion@#As a result, there was not much difference in the patterns of medical use for the under 5% income group who are likely to be eligible for expanded medical aids when the family support rule is alleviated. In addition, more than 30% of them are in arrears with their health insurance premiums, causing inconvenience in using medical services. These findings suggest the need of abolishing the criteria obligated to support family, and great efforts should be made to contribute to non-paid poor and remove their medical blind spot.
RESUMO
Background@#There is a controversy whether it is safe to continue renin-angiotensin system blockers in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We analyzed big data to investigate whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or angiotensin II receptor blockers have any significant effect on the risk of COVID-19. Population-based cohort study was conducted based on the prescription data from nationwide health insurance records. @*Methods@#We investigated the 1,374,381 residents aged ≥ 40 years living in Daegu, the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak, between February and March 2020. Prescriptions of antihypertensive medication during the year before the outbreak were extracted from the National Health Insurance Service registry. Medications were categorized by types and stratified by the medication possession ratios (MPRs) of antihypertensive medications after controlling for the potential confounders. The risk of COVID-19 was estimated using a difference in difference analysis. @*Results@#Females, older individuals, low-income earners, and recently hospitalized patients had a higher risk of infection. Patients with higher MPRs of antihypertensive medications had a consistently lower risk of COVID-19 than those with lower MPRs of antihypertensive medications and non-users. Among patients who showed complete compliance, there was a significantly lower risk of COVID-19 for those prescribed angiotensin II receptor blockers (relative risk [RR], 0.751; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.587–0.960) or calcium channel blockers (RR, 0.768; 95% CI, 0.601–0.980). @*Conclusion@#Renin-angiotensin system blockers or other antihypertensive medications do not increase the risk of COVID-19. Patients should not stop antihypertensive medications, including renin-angiotensin system blockers, because of concerns of COVID-19.