• Users Online: 441
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 178-183

Health insurance coverage and its sociodemographic determinants among urban and rural residents of Haryana

1 Department of Community Medicine, ESIC Medical College and Hospital, Faridabad, Haryana, India
2 Department of Community Medicine, SHKM GMC, Mewat, Haryana, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mitasha Singh
Department of Community Medicine, ESIC Medical College and Hospital, Faridabad - 121 001, Haryana
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/bjhs.bjhs_106_20

Rights and Permissions

BACKGROUND: The National Family Health Survey 4 data state that health insurance (HI) coverage is 28.2% in urban areas, 29.0% in rural areas, and overall 28.7% in India. To achieve universal health coverage and to reduce out-of-pocket expenditure, it is prudent to enhance coverage of HI, especially among middle and low socioeconomic status (SES) strata. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to estimate HI coverage among rural and urban households and compare the sociodemographic determinants of HI. METHODOLOGY: A community-based, cross-sectional study was conducted in 179 rural and 193 urban households. The tool was a structured questionnaire administered to all consented participants. RESULTS: Awareness about any type of HI scheme was almost equal in rural and urban areas (74.9% and 74.6%, respectively) whereas coverage was much better in urban (58.0%) than rural areas (38.5%). TPA/private schemes were mostly availed by rural while the majority in urban areas availed employer-based or public sector HI schemes. The main reason for availing HI as quoted by rural families was tax gains (66.7%) and to cover medical expenses (46.4%) or compulsion from employer (41.1%) by urban families. HI coverage was observed to be better among urban families having dependents (children or elderly) as compared to rural and rural Hindus as compared to urban. HI coverage was significantly higher among upper- and upper-middle-class strata (as per BG Prasad classification) rural households than urban (P = 0.005 and 0.008, respectively). However, lower-middle and lower classes in urban areas have better coverage (P = 0.028 and 0.076, respectively). CONCLUSION: HI awareness among the rural as well as the urban population is quite good. There is a need to bridge the gap between awareness and coverage of HI by motivating middle and low SES strata and introducing affordable and acceptable HI schemes for them.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded72    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal