Public health insurance coverage in India before and after PM-JAY: repeated cross-sectional analysis of nationally representative survey data.

INTRODUCTION: The provision of non-contributory public health insurance (NPHI) to marginalised populations is a critical step along the path to universal health coverage. We aimed to assess the extent to which Ayushman Bharat-Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY)-potentially, the world's largest NPHI programme-has succeeded in raising health insurance coverage of the poorest two-fifths of the population of India. METHODS: We used nationally representative data from the National Family Health Survey on 633 699 and 601 509 households in 2015-2016 (pre-PM-JAY) and 2019-2021 (mostly, post PM-JAY), respectively. We stratified by urban/rural and estimated NPHI coverage nationally, and by state, district and socioeconomic categories. We decomposed coverage variance between states, districts, and households and measured socioeconomic inequality in coverage. For Uttar Pradesh, we tested whether coverage increased most in districts where PM-JAY had been implemented before the second survey and whether coverage increased most for targeted poorer households in these districts. RESULTS: We estimated that NPHI coverage increased by 11.7 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 11.0% to 12.4%) and 8.0 pp (95% CI 7.3% to 8.7%) in rural and urban India, respectively. In rural areas, coverage increased most for targeted households and pro-rich inequality decreased. Geographical inequalities in coverage narrowed. Coverage did not increase more in states that implemented PM-JAY. In Uttar Pradesh, the coverage increase was larger by 3.4 pp (95% CI 0.9% to 6.0%) and 4.2 pp (95% CI 1.2% to 7.1%) in rural and urban areas, respectively, in districts exposed to PM-JAY and the increase was 3.5 pp (95% CI 0.9% to 6.1%) larger for targeted households in these districts. CONCLUSION: The introduction of PM-JAY coincided with increased public health insurance coverage and decreased inequality in coverage. But the gains cannot all be plausibly attributed to PM-JAY, and they are insufficient to reach the goal of universal coverage of the poor.

Sociodemographic and geographic inequalities in diagnosis and treatment of older adults' chronic conditions in India: a nationally representative population-based study.

CONTEXT: Expeditious diagnosis and treatment of chronic conditions are critical to control the burden of non-communicable disease in low- and middle-income countries. We aimed to estimate sociodemographic and geographic inequalities in diagnosis and treatment of chronic conditions among adults aged 45 + in India. METHODS: We used 2017-18 nationally representative data to estimate prevalence of chronic conditions (hypertension, diabetes, lung disease, heart disease, stroke, arthritis, cholesterol, and neurological) reported as diagnosed and percentages of diagnosed conditions that were untreated by sociodemographic characteristics and state. We used concentration indices to measure socioeconomic inequalities in diagnosis and lack of treatment. Fully adjusted inequalities were estimated with multivariable probit and fractional regression models. FINDINGS: About 46.1% (95% CI: 44.9 to 47.3) of adults aged 45 + reported a diagnosis of at least one chronic condition and 27.5% (95% CI: 26.2 to 28.7) of the reported conditions were untreated. The percentage untreated was highest for neurological conditions (53.2%; 95% CI: 50.1 to 59.6) and lowest for diabetes (10.1%; 95% CI: 8.4 to 11.5). Age- and sex-adjusted prevalence of any diagnosed condition was highest in the richest quartile (55.3%; 95% CI: 53.3 to 57.3) and lowest in the poorest (37.7%: 95% CI: 36.1 to 39.3). Conditional on reported diagnosis, the percentage of conditions untreated was highest in the poorest quartile (34.4%: 95% CI: 32.3 to 36.5) and lowest in the richest (21.1%: 95% CI: 19.2 to 23.1). Concentration indices confirmed these patterns. Multivariable models showed that the percentage of untreated conditions was 6.0 points higher (95% CI: 3.3 to 8.6) in the poorest quartile than in the richest. Between state variations in the prevalence of diagnosed conditions and their treatment were large. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring more equitable treatment of chronic conditions in India requires improved access for poorer, less educated, and rural older people who often remain untreated even once diagnosed.

Prevalence of pain and its treatment among older adults in India: a nationally representative population-based study.

ABSTRACT: There were no estimates of the prevalence of pain and its treatment in the older population of India obtained from face-to-face interviews with a nationally representative sample. We addressed this evidence gap by using data on 63,931 individuals aged 45 years and older from the 2017/2018 Longitudinal Ageing Study in India. We identified pain from an affirmative response to the question: Are you often troubled by pain? We also identified those who reported pain that limited usual activities and who received treatment for pain. We estimated age- and sex-adjusted prevalence of pain, pain limiting usual activity and treatment, and compared these estimates across states and sociodemographic groups. We used a multivariable probit model to estimate full adjusted differences in the probability of each outcome across states and sociodemographic groups. We estimated that 36.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 35.3-37.8) of older adults in India were often troubled by pain and 25.2% (95% CI: 24.2-26.1) experienced pain limiting usual activity. We estimated that 73.3% (95% CI: 71.9-74.6) of those often troubled by pain and 76.4% (95% CI: 74.9-78.0) of those with pain that limited usual activity received treatment. There was large variation in each outcome across states. Fully adjusted prevalence of pain and pain limiting usual activity were higher among individuals who were female, older, less educated, rural residents, and poorer. Prevalence of treatment among those troubled by pain was lower among socially disadvantaged groups.

Awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in adults aged 45 years and over and their spouses in India: A nationally representative cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Lack of nationwide evidence on awareness, treatment, and control (ATC) of hypertension among older adults in India impeded targeted management of this condition. We aimed to estimate rates of hypertension ATC in the older population and to assess differences in these rates across sociodemographic groups and states in India. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a nationally representative survey of individuals aged 45 years and over and their spouses in all Indian states (except one) in 2017 to 2018. We identified hypertension by blood pressure (BP) measurement ≥140/90 mm Hg or self-reported diagnosis if also taking medication or observing salt/diet restriction to control BP. We distinguished those who (i) reported diagnosis ("aware"); (ii) reported taking medication or being under salt/diet restriction to control BP ("treated"); and (iii) had measured systolic BP <140 and diastolic BP <90 ("controlled"). We estimated age-sex adjusted hypertension prevalence and rates of ATC by consumption quintile, education, age, sex, urban-rural, caste, religion, marital status, living arrangement, employment status, health insurance, and state. We used concentration indices to measure socioeconomic inequalities and multivariable logistic regression to estimate fully adjusted differences in these outcomes. Study limitations included reliance on BP measurement on a single occasion, missing measurements of BP for some participants, and lack of data on nonadherence to medication. The 64,427 participants in the analysis sample had a median age of 57 years: 58% were female, and 70% were rural dwellers. We estimated hypertension prevalence to be 41.9% (95% CI 41.0 to 42.9). Among those with hypertension, we estimated that 54.4% (95% CI 53.1 to 55.7), 50.8% (95% CI 49.5 to 52.0), and 28.8% (95% CI 27.4 to 30.1) were aware, treated, and controlled, respectively. Across states, adjusted rates of ATC ranged from 27.5% (95% CI 22.2 to 32.8) to 75.9% (95% CI 70.8 to 81.1), from 23.8% (95% CI 17.6 to 30.1) to 74.9% (95% CI 69.8 to 79.9), and from 4.6% (95% CI 1.1 to 8.1) to 41.9% (95% CI 36.8 to 46.9), respectively. Age-sex adjusted rates were lower (p < 0.001) in poorer, less educated, and socially disadvantaged groups, as well as for males, rural residents, and the employed. Among individuals with hypertension, the richest fifth were 8.5 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 5.3 to 11.7; p < 0.001), 8.9 pp (95% CI 5.7 to 12.0; p < 0.001), and 7.1 pp (95% CI 4.2 to 10.1; p < 0.001) more likely to be aware, treated, and controlled, respectively, than the poorest fifth. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension prevalence was high, and ATC of the condition were low among older adults in India. Inequalities in these indicators pointed to opportunities to target hypertension management more effectively and equitably on socially disadvantaged groups.

Economic gradient of onset of disability in India.

BACKGROUND: Disability in India is associated with increasing non-communicable diseases, rising longevity, and increasing accidents and injuries. Though studies have examined prevalence, patterns, and socioeconomic correlates of disability, no attempt has been made in estimating age of onset of disability in India. OBJECTIVE: This paper investigates the economic gradient of age of onset of locomotor, visual, hearing, speech, mental retardation, mental illness, and other disabilities in India. METHOD: We use nationally representative data of 106,894 disabled individuals from the 76th round of National Sample Survey (NSS), 2018. Descriptive statistics, kernel density, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and linear regression models are used in the analysis. RESULT: The disability rate in India was 2184 per 100,000 persons. The disability rate was highest for locomotor (1353) followed by hearing (296), visual (234), speech (228), mental retardation (158), and mental illness (131). Over 85% of mental retardation and 80% of speech disabilities occur at birth, while 82% of locomotor and 81% of visual disabilities occur after birth. Among those who had disability after birth, the median age for mental retardation was 2 years followed by mental illness (28 years), speech (29 years), locomotor (42 years), visual (55 years), and 56 years for hearing disability. Adjusting for socioeconomic covariates, the age of onset of locomotor and speech disabilities among the poorest individuals were 7 and 11 years earlier than the richest, respectively. CONCLUSION: The economic gradient of onset of locomotive and speech disabilities are strong. The age of onset of disability was earliest for mental retardation followed by mental illness and speech disability.

Morbidity compression or expansion? A temporal analysis of the age at onset of non-communicable diseases in India.

While there is evidence of morbidity compression in many countries, temporal patterns of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in developing countries, such as India, are less clear. Age at onset of disease offers insights to understanding epidemiologic trends and is a key input for public health programs. Changes in age at onset and duration of major NCDs were estimated for 2004 (n = 38,044) and 2018 (n = 43,239) using health surveys from the India National Sample Survey (NSS). Survival regression models were used to compare trends by sociodemographic characteristics. Comparing 2004 to 2018, there were reductions in age at onset and increases in duration for overall and cause-specific NCDs. Median age at onset decreased for NCDs overall (57 to 53 years) and for diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, asthma, mental diseases, eye disease, and bone disease in the range of 2-7 years and increased for cancer, neurological disorders, some genitourinary disorders, and injuries/accidents in the range of 2-14 years. Hazards of NCDs were higher among females for cancers (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.19-1.90) and neurological disorders (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.06-1.32) but lower for heart diseases (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.97) and injuries/accidents (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99). Hazards were greater among those with lower educational attainment at younger ages and higher educational attainment later in life. Unlike many countries, chronic disease morbidity may be expanding in India for many chronic diseases, indicating excess strain on the health system. Public health programs should focus on early diagnosis and prevention of NCDs.

Understanding equity of institutional delivery in public health centre by level of care in India: an assessment using benefit incidence analysis.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Mission (NHM), the largest ever publicly funded health programme worldwide, used over half of the national health budget in India and primarily aimed to improve maternal and child health in the country. Though large scale public health investment has improved the health care utilization and health outcomes across states and socio-economic groups in India, little is known on the equity concern of NHM. In this context, this paper examines the utilization pattern and net benefit of public subsidy for institutional delivery by the level of care in India. METHODS: Data from the most recent round of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS 4), conducted during 2015-16, was used in the study. A total of 148,645 last birth delivered in a health centre during the 5 years preceding the survey were used for the analyses. Out-of-pocket (OOP) payment on delivery care was taken as the dependent variable and was analysed by primary care and secondary level of care. Benefits Incidence Analysis (BIA), descriptive statistics, concentration index (CI), and concentration curve (CC) were used to do the analysis. RESULTS: Institutional delivery from the public health centres in India is pro-poor and has a strong economic gradient. However, about 28% mothers from richest wealth quintile did not pay for delivery in public health centres compared to 16% among the poorest wealth quintile. Benefit incidence analyses suggests a pro-poor distribution of institutional delivery both at primary and secondary level of care. In 2015-16, at the primary level, about 32.29% of subsidies were used by the poorest, 27.22% by poorer, 20.39% by middle, 13.36% by richer and 6.73% by the richest wealth quintile. The pattern at the secondary level was similar, though the magnitude was lower. The concentration index of institutional delivery in public health centres was - 0.161 [95% CI, - 0.158, - 0.165] compared to 0.296 [95% CI, 0.289, 0.303] from private health centres. CONCLUSION: Provision and use of public subsidy for institutional delivery in public health centres is pro-poor in India. Improving the quality of service in primary health centres is recommended to increase utilisation and reduce OOP payment for health care in India.