10 research outputs found
A determinants analysis on regional variation of health care utilization
보건νκ³Ό/λ°μ¬[νκΈ]
μ΄ μ°κ΅¬λ λμ Β·λμ΄μ΄ μ§μκ° μλ£κ³΅κΈμ μ°¨μ΄κ° λλ ·νκ² μ‘΄μ¬ν¨μλ λΆκ΅¬νκ³ μ§μκ° μλ£μ΄μ©μμ€μλ ν° μ°¨μ΄κ° μκ±°λ μ€νλ € μλ£κ³΅κΈμ΄ λΆμ‘±ν λμ΄μ§μμμ μλ£μ΄μ© μμ€μ΄ λμλ μμΈμ μ°Ύμλ³΄κ³ μ νμλ€. νν μ°λ¦¬λλΌμ μ€μ§λ£κΆμ λΆμλμμΌλ‘
νμ¬ μ€μ§λ£κΆμ΄ μν νμ ꡬμμ κΈ°μ€μΌλ‘ λμμ§μ, λμμ λμ΄μ΄ νΌν©μ§μ, λμ΄μ΄μ§μμΌλ‘ λλμ΄ λΆμνμλ€. λΆμμλ£λ μλ£λ³΄ν μ°ν©νμ 1992λ
μ‘°ν©λ³ κ²°μ°μλ£μ λμνμ μ°κ΅¬μμ μ κ΅ ν΅κ³μ°κ°μ μ΄μ©νμλ€. μΈμ§μκ°μ μλ£κ³΅κΈμμΈ, μλ£νμμμΈ,
κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ μλ£μ΄μ©μ μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό κ²μ νκΈ° μν΄ λΆμ°λΆμμ μ€μνμλ€. κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ μ§μκ° μλ£μ΄μ©μ μ°¨μ΄κ° μκΈ΄ μμΈμ ꡬλͺ
νκ³ μ μλ£κ³΅κΈμμΈκ³Ό μλ£νμμμΈμ κ°κ° λλ λͺ¨λ ν΅μ ν μ€νκ· λΆμμ μ€μνμ¬ μ§μκ° μλ£μ΄μ©μ μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό ν¬κΈ°μ κ·Έ λΆνΈμ λ³νμ μ΄μ μ
λμ΄ μ΄ν΄λ³΄μλ€.
1, μλ£κ³΅κΈ μμ€μ 보건μλ£κΈ°κ΄μλ₯Ό μ μΈν μμ¬μ, λ³μμ, κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ μΌλ°μλ£κΈ°κ΄μμ μμ΄ λμμ§μ, λμμ λμ΄μ΄ νΌν©μ§μ, κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμμΌλ‘ λμμΌλ©° 보건μλ£κΈ°κ΄μλ λμ΄μ΄μ§μ, λμμ λμ΄μ΄ νΌν©μ§μ, λμμ§μ μμΌλ‘ λμλ€.
2. μλ£νμλ³μμ ν΄λΉνλ μ°λ Ήκ΅¬μ‘°μ μ¬νκ²½μ μ μΈ μ¬κ±΄μ μ§μλ³ μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό 보면 λμμ§μμ μμ μ μΈκ΅¬μ 9μΈ μ΄ν λ° 25μΈμμ 44μΈ κΉμ§ μ²μ₯λ
μ μΈκ΅¬λΉκ° λμ λ°λ©΄ λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμ κ²½μ°μλ 55μΈ μ΄μμ μ₯λ
μΈκ΅¬λΉμ λ
Έλ
μΈκ΅¬λΉκ° λμλ€. μ¬νκ²½μ μ μΈ μ¬κ±΄μ 보면 λμμ§μμ λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμ λΉν΄ μ§μμλμ΄ λκ³ μλ£κ°κ²©μ ν΄λΉνλ κ±΄λΉ μΈλλ³ΈμΈλΆλ΄μ‘μ΄ λμλ€.
3. λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμ μλ£κ³΅κΈμ΄ μ·¨μ½ν¨μλ λΆκ΅¬νκ³ μλ£μ΄μ© μμ€μ λμ΄μ΄μ§μμ΄ λμμ§μμ΄λ λμμ λμ΄μ΄ νΌν©μ§μμ λΉν΄ μ
μμμ§μ¨μμλ μ°¨μ΄κ° μμΌλ, μΈλμμ§μ¨μμλ μ€νλ € λμλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ μλ£νμμμΈμ ν΅μ νλ©΄ μ§μκ° μλ£μ΄μ©μμ€μ μ°¨μ΄λ μ
μνμ§ μμΌλ κ·Έ ν¬κΈ°κ° μ€μ΄ λ€μ΄ μ΄λ¬ν μμΈμ΄ μλ£νμλ³μμ μ°¨μ΄ λλ¬Έμ μν₯μ λ°μ κ²μΌλ‘ μκ°λλ€. λν μλ£λ³΄ν μ°ν©ν μ°λ³΄λ₯Ό μ΄μ©νμ¬ λμμ λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμ μ°λ Ή μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό κ΅μ ν ν μλ£μ΄μ©μμ€μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό λΆμνλ©΄ λμμ§μμ΄ λμ΄μ΄ μ§μλ³΄λ€ μ
μμμ§
μ¨κ³Ό μΈλμμ§μ¨ λͺ¨λ λμ μμ μ¬μ€μ κ°μ μ μΌλ‘ λ·λ°μΉ¨νμλ€. μ΄λ¬ν κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μ’
ν©ν΄ 보면 λμ΄ μ§μμμ μ§μκ° μλ£μ΄μ©μ΄ λκ² λνλλ νμμ μ°λ Ήκ΅¬μ‘°μ μ°¨μ΄ λ±μ λ°λ₯Έ μλ£νμμμΈμ μ°¨μ΄ λλ¬Έμ κΈ°μΈλ κ²μΌλ‘ λ³Ό μ μλ€.
4. μ·¨μ½ν μλ£κ³΅κΈμ κ°μ§κ³ μλ λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμ μ 체 μΈλμμ§μ¨μ΄ λμμ§μμ΄λ λμμ λμ΄μ΄ νΌν©μ§μμ λΉν΄ μ μνκ² λμλ λ λ€λ₯Έ μ΄μ λ λμ΄μ΄μ§μμ 보건μλ£κΈ°κ΄μ΄ μ 체 μΈλμμ§μ¨μ κΈ°μ¬νλ λΉμ€μ΄ 25.3%λ‘μ¨ λ€λ₯Έ μ§μμ λΉν΄ λ§€μ° λμκΈ° λλ¬Έμ΄λ€. κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘ λ³΄κ±΄μλ£κΈ°κ΄μ μλ£κ³΅κΈμ΄ μ·¨μ½ν λμ΄μ΄ μ§μμ μλ£ μ κ·Όλλ₯Ό λμ¬ μ£Όλ μν μ μννκ³ μμμ μ μ μλ€.
[μλ¬Έ]
This study was conducted to investigate determinants what regional medical utilization variation did not exist no matter which regional variation of medical supply and need existed. The summary data o( fiscal year 1992 Medical Insurance Program for Self-employeds obtained from national federation of medical insurance and the data of year 1992 national statistical yearbook obtain from institute of city administration were used for the study.
Main findings of the research can be summarized as follows.
1. Except for regional public sector medical institute allocation, Medical supply distribution as doctors per capita, beds per capita, and privite sector medical institute, were ranked SMSA area, unban and rural mixed area(Mixture area), and
rural area, and this figure was statistically significant. This result provides strong evidence that medical supply was centralazed in urban areas.
2. Regional age structure and socio-economic condition were different between 3 areas and both figures were statistically significant. The result provides evidence for existence of regional medical need variation.
3. Although there was uneven distribution in regional medical supply, rural area was not significantly different from SMSA and mixture area in inpatient medical utilization and was higher than SMSA and mixture area in outpatient medical utilization. this result caused that regional age structure was different. so that
old-age insuree of rural area was much more than different 2 areas and also this group medical utilization was higher than the 2 areas.
4. Rural public sector medical institutes supplement well medical supply shortage of rural area. And outpatient public sector medical utilization increases significantly total outpatient utilization.restrictio