ObjectivesTo compare the effects of the Rajiv Aarogyasri Health Insurance Scheme of Andhra Pradesh (AP) with health financing innovations including the Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY) in Maharashtra (MH) over time on access to and out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) on hospital inpatient care.Study designA difference-in-differences (DID) study using repeated cross-sectional surveys with parallel control.SettingNational Sample Survey Organisation of India (NSSO) urban and rural ‘first stratum units’, 863 in AP and 1008 in MH.MethodsWe used two cross-sectional surveys: as a baseline, the data from the NSSO 2004 survey collected before the Aarogyasri and RSBY schemes were launched; and as postintervention, a survey using the same methodology conducted in 2012.Participants8623 households in AP and 10 073 in MH.Main outcome measuresAverage OOPE, large OOPE and large borrowing per household per year for inpatient care, hospitalisation rate per 1000 population per year.ResultsAverage expenditure, large expenditures and large borrowings on inpatient care had increased in MH and AP, but the increase was smaller in AP across these three measures. DIDs for average expenditure and large borrowings were significant and in favour of AP for the rural and the poorest households. Hospitalisation rates also increased in both states but more so in AP, although the DID was not significant and the subgroup analysis presented a mixed picture.ConclusionsHealth innovations in AP had a greater beneficial effect on inpatient care-related expenditures than innovations in MH. The Aarogyasri scheme is likely to have contributed to these impacts in AP, at least in part. However, OOPE increased in both states over time. Schemes such as the Aarogyasri and RSBY may result in some positive outcomes, but additional interventions may be required to improve access to care for the most vulnerable sections of the population.

Poor quality care in public sector hospitals coupled with the costs of care in the private sector have trapped India's poor in a vicious cycle of poverty, ill health and debt for many decades. To address this, the governments of Andhra Pradesh (AP) and Maharashtra (MH), India, have attempted to improve people’s access to hospital care by partnering with the private sector. A number of government-sponsored schemes with differing specifications have been launched to facilitate this strategy.Aims This article aims to compare changes in access to, and affordability and efficiency of private and public hospital inpatient (IP) treatments between MH and AP from 2004 to 2012 and to assess whether the health financing innovations in one state resulted in larger or smaller benefits compared with the other.Methods We used data from household surveys conducted in 2004 and 2012 in the two states and undertook a difference-in-difference (DID) analysis. The results focus on hospitalization, out-of-pocket expenditure and length of stay.Results The average IP expenditure for private hospital care has increased in both states, but more so in MH. There was also an observable increase in both utilization of and expenditure on nephrology treatment in private hospitals in AP. The duration of stay recorded in days for private hospitals has increased slightly in MH and declined in AP with a significant DID. The utilization of public hospitals has reduced in AP and increased in MH.Conclusion The state of AP appears to have benefited more than MH in terms of improved access to care by involving the private sector. The Aarogyasri scheme is likely to have contributed to these impacts in AP at least in part. Our study needs to be followed up with repeated evaluations to ascertain the long-term impacts of involving the private sector in providing hospital care.

This paper is a qualitative assessment of a public health insurance scheme in the state of Andhra Pradesh, south India, called the Rajiv Aarogyasri Community Health Insurance Scheme (or Aarogyasri), using the case-study method. Focusing on inpatient hospital care and especially on surgical treatments leaves the scheme wanting in meeting the health care needs of and addressing the impoverishing health expenditure incurred by the poor, especially those living in rural areas. Though well-intentioned, people from vulnerable sections of society may find the scheme ultimately unhelpful for their needs. Through an in-depth qualitative approach, the paper highlights not just financial difficulties but also the non-financial barriers to accessing health care, despite the existence of a scheme such as Aarogyasri. Narrative evidence from poor households offers powerful insights into why even the most innovative state health insurance schemes may not achieve their goals and systemic corrections needed to address barriers to health care.

No abstract