다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기
KJWHN : Korean journal of women health nursing, v.21 no.3, 2015년, pp.171 - 183
한수경 (중앙대학교 적십자간호대학) , 강희선 (중앙대학교 적십자간호대학)
AI-Helper
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the perception of infertile women on the use of the national support program that provides medical expense aid to infertile couples. Methods: Thirty Korean infertile women participated in five focus groups. Data were collected from January to August ...
| 핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
|---|---|---|
| 2010년 난임으로 진료를 받은 인원은? | 최근 한국의 난임 부부는 꾸준히 증가하여 난임으로 진료를 받은 인원은 2006년에 약 15만 명이었으나 2010년에는 24% 증가한 18만 4천명이었고 이에 따른 난임 진료비도 상승하여 2006년 143억 원에서 2010년 203억 원으로 42%나 증가하였다[1]. 난임과 관련된 진료비가 급증한 것은 난임 가구가 늘어났을 뿐 아니라 난관 촬영과 호르몬 검사 등 일부 검사에만 건강보험이 적용되고 인공수정이나 체외수정 등의 보조생식술(assisted reproductive technology)은 건강 보험에서 제외되고 있기 때문이다[2]. | |
| 도입 당시 난임 지원사업의 자격요건은? | 한국 정부의 난임 지원사업은 보조생식술이 필요한 일정 소득계층 이하의 난임 부부에게 시술비의 일부를 지원하는 정책으로 2006년에 시작되었다. 도입 당시에는 ‘불임부부 지원사업’이라는 명칭으로 가계소득이 도시근로자가구 기준 월 평균소득의 130% 이하이고 여성이 만 44세 이하인 부부를 대상으로 체외수정에 한하여 회당 150만원씩 3회까지 지원하였다. 2010년에는 지원대상의 가계소득 기준을 150%로 상향하고, 인공수정을 하는 경우에도 50만원씩 3회까지 보조했다. | |
| 난임과 관련된 진료비가 급증한 이유는? | 최근 한국의 난임 부부는 꾸준히 증가하여 난임으로 진료를 받은 인원은 2006년에 약 15만 명이었으나 2010년에는 24% 증가한 18만 4천명이었고 이에 따른 난임 진료비도 상승하여 2006년 143억 원에서 2010년 203억 원으로 42%나 증가하였다[1]. 난임과 관련된 진료비가 급증한 것은 난임 가구가 늘어났을 뿐 아니라 난관 촬영과 호르몬 검사 등 일부 검사에만 건강보험이 적용되고 인공수정이나 체외수정 등의 보조생식술(assisted reproductive technology)은 건강 보험에서 제외되고 있기 때문이다[2]. 이로 인해 난임 여성들은 치료 과정에서 경제적 부담이 커지는데, 이를 해소하기 위해 ‘난임부부 시술비 지원사업’이 시행되었다[3]. |
Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service. Press release for increase in infertile couples [Internet]. Seoul: Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service; 2015 [cited 2011 October 18]. Available from: http://www.hira.or.kr/dummy.do?pgmidHIRAA020041000000&cmsurl/cms/notice/02/1208237_24959
Hwang NM. Physical, psychological and social-economic burden and demands of infertile women. Health.Welfare Issue & Focus. 2011:74;1-8.
Seo K. Reproductive health. Obstetrics & Gynecology Science. 2009;52(4):387-390.
Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs. Public funding for assisted reproductive technology for infertile couples [Internet]. Seoul: Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs; 2015 [cited 2015 January 20]. Available from: http://www.korea.go.kr/service/serviceInfoView.do?svcSeq9054&rnum9&searchType0&ctyCode060000&Mcode1107
Lim J, Lee JH. Direction and support level of the fertility welfare policy in South Korea. Journal of Population Ageing. 2014;7(2):115-141.
Berg Brigham K, Cadier B, Chevreul K. The diversity of regulation and public financing of IVF in Europe and its impact on utilization. Human Reproduction. 2013;28(3):666-675.
Dunn AL, Stafinski T, Menon D. An international survey of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) policies and the effects of these policies on costs, utilization, and health outcomes. Health Policy. 2014;116(2-3):238-263.
Cook JL, Collins J, Buckett W, Racowsky C, Hughes E, Jarvi K. Assisted reproductive technology-related multiple births: Canada in an international context. Journal of Obstetrics Gynaecology Canada. 2011;33(2):159-167.
Cabello Y, Gomez-Palomares JL, Castilla JA, Hernandez J, Marqueta J, Pareja A, et al. Impact of the Spanish fertility society guidelines on the number of embryos to transfer. Reproductive Biomedicine Online. 2010;21(5):667-675.
Chambers GM, Illingworth PJ, Sullivan EA. Assisted reproductive technology: Public funding and the voluntary shift to single embryo transfer in Australia. Medical Journal of Australia. 2011;195(10):594-598.
Tulandi T, King L, Zelkowitz P. Public funding of and access to in vitro fertilization. New England Journal of Medicine. 2013;368(20):1948-1949.
Yoo GS. The effects of fertility policies on childbirth in 2007. Journal of Family Relations. 2009;14(1):169-189.
Hwang NM, Hwang JH, Kim JE. Evaluation of the national supporting program for infertility couples and future policy directions in Korea. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 2010.
Hwang JH, Min EG. Public funding for assisted reproductive technology. Korean Journal of Reproductive Medicine. 2009; 36(4):237-247.
Kim GR. The evaluation and prospect of infertile couple support policy- Focused on women's rights to child-birth and rights to health. Journal of Regional Studies. 2012;20(2):181-200.
Hwang NM, Shin HW, Jang IS, Park JS, Kim HN. Reimbursement system of intrauterine insemination treatment and future policy directions in Korea. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs; 2012.
Ha JO. Reproductive rights: Placing the concept in a historical and political context. Health and Social Science. 2013;34:183-210.
Kang HS, Kim MJ. Experiences of infertile women in unsuccessful In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing. 2004;10(2):119-127.
Kim YS. A phenomenological study on the adoption experience of infertile women [dissertation]. Seoul: Kukje Theological University and Seminary; 2011.
Lee YJ. An ethnography on infertile women's grief in Korea [dissertation]. Seoul: Kyung Hee University; 2008.
Han HS. A study on Korean women infertility experiencing: Ground theory approach [dissertation]. Seoul: Ewha Womans University; 2002.
Kang HS, Son YD. Experience of Korean pregnant women for the use of medical expense aid service (KoEnMom Card). Journal of Korean Society Maternal and Child Health. 2011;15(2): 175-185.
Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health. 2000;23(4):334-340.
Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2009.
Lincolon YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1985.
Maeda E, Ishihara O, Saito H, Kuwahara A, Toyokawa S, Kobayashi Y. Age-specific cost and public funding of a live birth following assisted reproductive treatment in Japan. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research. 2014;40(5):1338-1344.
Dolan P, Rudisill C. Babies in waiting: Why increasing the IVF age cut-off might lead to fewer wanted pregnancies in the presence of procrastination. Health Policy. 2015;119(2):174-179.
Hodgetts K, Hiller JE, Street JM, Carter D, Braunack-Mayer AJ, Watt AM, et al. Disinvestment policy and the public funding of assisted reproductive technologies: Outcomes of deliberative engagements with three key stakeholder groups. BMC Health Services Research. 2014;14:204.
Seo IP. Extension of public funding for assisted reproductive technology for infertile couples in Yang Pyoung. KyeongIn Newspaper. 2014 August 19; Sect. 20.
Copyright KISTI. All Rights Reserved.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.