Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of multiple linear regression models for the whole sample

From: Effectiveness evaluation of quota payment for specific diseases under global budget: a typical provider payment system reform in rural China

Crude model

Model I

Model II

Adjusted total fee

 2014

0

0

0

 2015

69.72 (−36.14, 175.59)

50.23 (−56.18, 156.64)

1122.11 (1018.04, 1226.17) ***

 2016

−213.16 (−316.29, −110.03) ***

−224.61 (−328.94, − 120.29) ***

1121.19 (1018.37, 1224.02) ***

Actual compensation ratio

 2014

0

0

0

 2015

12.66 (12.17, 13.15) ***

12.70 (12.2, 13.19) ***

6.04 (5.61, 6.47) ***

 2016

15.91 (15.43, 16.39) ***

15.93 (15.44, 16.41) ***

7.13 (6.70, 7.55) ***

Out-of-pocket ratio

 2014

0

0

0

 2015

−2.29 (−2.50, −2.07) ***

−2.09 (− 2.31, − 1.88) ***

0.07 (−0.10, 0.25)

 2016

−5.62 (−5.84, −5.41) ***

−5.30 (− 5.50, − 5.09) ***

−1.88 (− 2.05, − 1.70) ***

Constituent ratio of treatment fee

 2014

0

0

0

 2015

2.96 (2.72, 3.19) ***

3.05 (2.81, 3.28) ***

4.36 (4.13, 4.59) ***

 2016

7.53 (7.29, 7.76) ***

7.67 (7.44, 7.90) ***

9.34 (9.12, 9.57) ***

Constituent ratio of inspection and laboratory fee

 2014

0

0

0

 2015

0.29 (0.16, 0.43) ***

0.25 (0.11, 0.38) ***

0.53 (0.39, 0.67) ***

 2016

0.73 (0.60, 0.86) ***

0.69 (0.56, 0.82) ***

1.14 (1.01, 1.28) ***

Length of stay

 2014

0

0

0

 2015

−0.28 (−0.40, −0.15) ***

−0.39 (− 0.52, − 0.27) ***

0.17 (0.04, 0.30) **

 2016

− 0.60 (− 0.72, − 0.48) ***

−0.74 (− 0.87, − 0.62) ***

−0.06 (− 0.19, 0.07)

  1. Data in the table: β (95%CI)
  2. ***p < 0.01; **0.01 ≤ p < 0.05; *p < 0.1
  3. Model I adjusted for sex, age and individual attribute; model II adjusted for compensation type