An analysis of government-sponsored health insurance enrolment and claims data from Meghalaya: Insights into the provision of health care in North East India

Abstract

Introduction: The Megha Health Insurance Scheme (MHIS) was launched in 2013 in the North-East Indian state of Meghalaya to reduce household out-of-pocket expenditure on health and provide access to high-quality essential healthcare. Despite substantial expansion of the MHIS since the scheme's inception, there is a lack of comprehensive documentation and evaluation of the scheme's performance against its Universal Health Care (UHC) objectives.

Methods: We analysed six years of enrolment and claims data (2013-2018) covering three phases of the scheme to understand the pattern of enrolment, utilisation and care provision under the MHIS during this period. De-identified data files included information on age, sex, district of residence, the district of provider hospital, type of hospital, date of admission, status at discharge, claimed category of care, package codes, and amount claimed. Descriptive statistics were generated to investigate key trends in enrolment, service utilisation, and Government health spending under the MHIS.

Results: Approximately 55% of the eligible population are currently enrolled in MHIS. Enrolment increased consistently from phase I through III and remained broadly stable across districts, gender, age group and occupation categories, with a small decline in males 19-60 years. Claims were disproportionately skewed towards private provision; 57% of all claims accrued to the 18 empanelled private hospitals and 39% to the 159 public sector facilities. The package 'General Ward Unspecified' was responsible for the highest volume of claims and highest financial dispensation across all three phases of the scheme. This likely indicates substantial administrative error and is potentially masking both true burden of disease and accurate financial provision for care under the MHIS. Anti-rabies injections for dog/cat bite contributed to 11% of total claims under MHIS III, and 1.6% of all claims under MHIS II. This warrants investigation to better understand the burden of animal bites on the Meghalayan population and inform the implementation of cost-effective strategies to reduce this burden.

Conclusions: This paper describes the first analysis of health insurance enrolment and claims data in the state of Meghalaya. The analysis has generated an important evidence base to inform future MHIS enrolment and care provision policies as the scheme expands to provide Universal Health Coverage to the state's entire population.

Fig 1. Highest volume packages by number of claims for MHIS III.

Key: ICU–intensive care unit; ANC–antenatal care.

Fig 2. Highest volume packages by number of claims for MHIS II.

Key: ICU–intensive care unit; ANC–antenatal care.

Fig 3. Financial provision (INR, in millions) for packages claimed under MHIS III.

Key: ICU–intensive care unit; ANC–antenatal care.

Fig 4. Financial provision (INR, in millions) for packages claimed under MHIS III.

Key: ICU–intensive care unit; ANC–antenatal care.