title: Private finance of services covered by the National Health Insurance package of benefits in Israel.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Private health expenditure in systems of national health insurance has raised concern in many countries. The concern is mainly about the accessibility of care to the poor and the sick, and inequality in use and in health. The concern thus refers specifically to the care financed privately rather than to private health expenditure as defined in the national health accounts.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To estimate the share of private finance in total use of services covered by the national package of benefits. and to relate the private finance of use to the income and health of the users.
  
  
  METHODS
  The Central Bureau of Statistics linked the 2009 Health Survey and the 2010 Incomes Survey. Twenty-four thousand five hundred ninety-five individuals in 7175 households were included in the data. Lacking data on the share of private finance in total cost of care delivered, we calculated instead the share of uses having any private finance-beyond copayments-in total uses, in primary, secondary, paramedical and total care. The probability of any private finance in each type of care is then related, using random effect logistic regression, to income and health state.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Fifteen percent of all uses of care covered by the national package of benefits had any private finance. This rate ranges from 10 % in primary care, 16 % in secondary care and 31 % in paramedical care. Twelve percent of all uses of physicians' services had any private finance, ranging from 10 % in family physicians to 20 % in pulmonologists, psychiatrists, neurologists and urologists. Controlling for health state, richer individuals are more likely to have any private finance in all types of care. Controlling for income, sick individuals (1+ chronic conditions) are 30 % in total care and 60 % in primary care more likely to have any private finance compared to healthy individuals (with no chronic conditions).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The national accounts' "private health spending" (39 % of total spending in 2010) is not of much use regarding equity of and accessibility to medical care by the population. The mean share of uses financed privately in 2010, a more relevant measure, is 15 % with large variation between types of care and physicians. While, as under national health insurance, richer persons contribute more into the finance of (private) medical care , and sicker persons are more likely to use it, the solidarity principle-cross subsidization from the rich to the sick, which is a fundamental principle of national health insurance systems, is clearly violated.
authors.affiliation: The Israeli Academic College, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
authors.forename: Esti
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Engelchin-Nissan
authors.affiliation: The Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Public Health, Jerusalem, 91120 Israel.
authors.forename: Amir
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Shmueli