請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/100953完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 許文馨 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Audrey Wen-Hsin Hsu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 林瑩娟 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Yin-Chuan Lin | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-11-26T16:14:06Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-11-27 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-11-26 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-10-21 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文部分
1. 王復興(2015),《我國全民健康保險保費之研究-以補充保險費為例》,國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 2. 王倢云(2022),《從加拿大公共醫保財源徵收機制檢視全民健保之費基改革》,國立成功大學法律學系碩士論文。 3. 行政院二代健保規劃小組(2005),「邁向權責相符的全民健康保險制度」,行政院二代健保規劃小組總結報告。 4. 吳求淳(2001),《台灣全民健保制度下支付制度與醫院管理制度間相關性之研究》,義守大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。 5. 吳凱勳、蘇久惠(2001),「加拿大健康保險醫療費用總額協定制度考察報告」,全民健康保險醫療費用協定委員會。 6. 林世昌(2022),《影響台灣藥品健保給付決策程序中納入病人參與意見之因素:回顧性研究》,臺北醫學大學醫務管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。 7. 林錦祿(2018),《臺灣健保體制中藥品給付價格制度之探討》,國立臺灣大學事業經營碩士在職學位學程碩士論文。 8. 房素米(2008),《以作業基礎成本制探討健保給付制度的合理性-以某署立療養院為例》,逢甲大學經營管理研究所碩士論文。 9. 許淑麗(2013),《台灣二代健保制度之影響因素分析》,逢甲大學經營管理碩士在職專班碩士論文。 10. 陳信宏(2022)《以憲法觀點來看新冠疫情下的全民健康保險給付制度-以未達8成補到8成健保給付為例》,靜宜大學法律學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。 11. 陳雅琪(2011),《台灣健保制度的倫理爭議-羅爾斯的觀點及其批評》,華梵大學哲學系碩士論文。 12. 張志誠(2016),《全民健保制度下醫療費用支付審查機制之檢討-以醫師專業自主為核心》,國立政治大學法學院碩士在職專班碩士論文。 13. 程馨、謝啟瑞(2005),「全民健保藥品政策與藥品費用的經濟分析」,《經社法治論叢》,第35期,頁1-42。 14. 曾玟富(2017),「2017年韓國健康保險審查及評估組織(HIRA)社會健康保險訓練課程」,衛福部中央健保署出國報告。 15. 楊詩涵(2022),《我國健康政策制定過程之探討:以高單價癌症藥物收載健保給費為例》,國立中山大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 16. 鄭書涵(2023),《台灣西醫師對健保制度相關議題的改善建議分析》,國立臺北護理健康大學健康事業管理研究所碩士論文。 17. 衛生福利部(2024),《中華民國113年版衛生福利年報》。 18. 衛生福利部中央健康保險署(2024),「2023年全民健康保險統計動向」。 19. 衛生福利部中央健康保險署(2013),「二代健保重點說明」,102年7月版。 20. 劉見祥、黃文鴻、黃千芳、黃肇明、陳玫妤、郭垂文(2006),「韓國及日本藥品支付制度考察」,中央健保署出國報告。 21. 蔡德揚(2015),《健保制度藥價政策對藥業競爭的影響》,國立臺灣大學EMBA碩士論文。 22. 賴炫羽(2011),《有關全民健保支付規定與藥品價差問題之研究》,東吳大學法律學系法律專業碩士班碩士論文。 23. 謝壬淼(2024),《全民健保變革之研究-以部分負擔為例》,東吳大學EMBA碩士論文。 24. 譚令蒂、洪乙禎、謝啟瑞(2005),「論藥價差」,中央研究院經濟所學術研討論文。 25. 譚延輝、李喜鳳、林綺珊、洪在華、湯澡薰、楊銘欽、蔡春玉、郎慧珠、陳壁榮、賴冠郎、蒲若芳(2007),《評估台灣推行醫療科技評估(HTA)制度於全民健康保險新藥收載之可行模式-以國外經驗為例》,衛生署委託研究計畫。 二、英文部分 1. Akaho, E., MacLaughlin, E. J. and Takeuchi, Y. (2003), “Comparison of prescription reimbursement methodologies in Japan and the United States,” Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, 43(4), pp.519-526. 2. Bae EY (2019), “Role of Health Technology Assessment in Drug Policies: Korea,” Value in Health Regional Issues, Vol.18, pp.24-29. 3. Bae EY and Lee EK (2009), “Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines and Their Implementation in the Positive List System in South Korea,” Value in Health, 12(3), pp.36-41. 4. Boyle, S. (2011), “United Kingdom (England) Health System Review,” Health System in Transition, 13(1). 5. Boyle, S. (2008), “The Health System in England,” Eurohealth, 14(1), pp.1-2. 6. Chung W, Kim HJ (2005), Interest Groups' Influence over Drug Pricing Policy Reform in South Korea,” Yonsei Medical Journal, 46(3), pp.321-330. 7. Collier, J. (2007), “The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme,” The British Medical Journal, 334(7591), pp.435-436. 8. Cook, J. P., Vernon, J. A. and Manning, R. (2008), “Pharmaceutical Risk-Sharing Agreements,” Pharmacoeconomics, 26(7), pp.551-556. 9. Department of Health (2013), “The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme 2014.” 10. Department of Health (2007), “Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Information project-United Kingdom.” 11. Department of Health, Disability and Ageing (2009), “Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Authority policies, procedures and methods.” 12. Garattini, L., Cornago, D. and De Compadri, P. (2006), “Pricing and Reimbursement of In-patent Drugs in Seven European Countries: A Comparative Analysis,” Health Policy, 82(3), pp.330-339. 13. Habl, C., Antony, K., Arts, D., Entleitner, M., Fröschl, B., Leopold, C., Stürzlinger, H., Vogler, S., Weigl, M. (2006), “Surveying, Assessing and Analysing the Pharmaceutical Sector in the 25 EU Member States,” ÖBIG. 14. Healy, J., Sharman, E. and Lokuge, B. (2006), “Australia Health System Review,” Health Systems in Transition, 8(5) 15. Henry, D. A., Hill, S. R. and Harris, A. (2005), “Drug Prices and Value for Money: the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme,” The Journal of the American Medical Association, 294(20), pp.2630-2632. 16. Ishikawa, K., Yamamoto, M., Kishi, D. T. and Nabeshima, T. (2005), “New prospective payment system in Japan,” American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 62(15), pp.1617-1619. 17. Izuka, T. (2008), “The Economics of Pharmaceutical Pricing and Physician Prescribing in Japan” SSRN Electronic Journal. 18. Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, “Pharmaceutical Administration and Regulations in Japan 2020.” 19. Kim CY (2009), “Health technology assessment in South Korea,” International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25(1), pp.219-223. 20. Lee TJ (2008), “Use of Economic Evaluation in the Listing and Pricing of Pharmaceuticals,” Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 41(2), pp.69-73. 21. Menon, D. (2001), “Pharmaceutical Cost Control In Canada: Does It Work?” Health Affairs, 20(3), pp.92-103. 22. Office of Fair Trading (2007), “The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme: An OFT market study”. 23. Paris, V. and Docteur, E. (2006), “Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Policies in Canada” OECD Health Working Papers, Vol.24. 24. Sweeny, K. (2007), “Key Aspects of the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme,” Pharmaceutical Industry Project Working Paper No.35, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies, Victoria University of Technology. 25. Tarn YH, Hu SL, Kamae, I., Yang BM, Li SC, Tangcharoensathien, V., Teerawattananon, Y., Limwattananon, S., Hameed, A. Aljunid, S. M. and Bapna, J. S. (2008), “Health-Care Systems and Pharmacoeconomic Research in Asia-Pacific Region,” Value in Health, 11(1), pp.137-155. 26. Yang BM, Bae EY and Kim J (2008), “Economic evaluation and pharmaceutical reimbursement reform in South Korea's National Health Insurance,” Health Affairs, 27(1), pp.179-187. 三、日文部分 1. 高橋未明(2016),「日本の薬価制度について」,厚生労働省医政局経済課。 2. 厚生労働省保険局医療課(2024),「令和6年度診療報酬改定の概要【入院Ⅴ(DPC/PDPS・短期滞在手術等)】」。 3. 厚生労働省保険局医療課(2024),「令 和 6 年 度 薬 価 制 度 改 革 に つ い て」。 4. 厚生労働省(2024),「令和6年10月からの医薬品の自己負担の新たな仕組み」。 5. 厚生労働省保険局(2017),「薬剤の自己負担について」。 四、網路部分 1. 厚生勞動省(2022),「薬価基準収載品目リスト及び後発医薬品に関する情報について(令和4年3月31日まで)」,https://www.mhlw.go.jp/topics/2021/04/tp20210401-01.html。 2. 張元融(2019),「健保滿意度 民眾9成醫界僅3成」,《臺灣醒報》,https://anntw.com/articles/20191126-rvUX。 3. 張雅淳(2024),「原廠不玩了1/十年內13款藥物退出台灣 「年用2000萬顆」這顆血壓藥也bye了」,《CTWANT》,9月16日,https://www.ctwant.com/article/363218/。 4. Department of Health, Disability and Aging, “Pharmaceutical Benefits: Fees, Patient Contributions and Safety Net Thresholds,” https://www.pbs.gov.au/info/healthpro/explanatory-notes/front/fee. 5. Department of Health, Disability and Aging, “Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) Membership,”https://www.pbs.gov.au/info/industry/listing/participants/pbac. 6. Minority Report (Poor Law), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(Poor_Law). 7. Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, “Compendium of Policies, Guidelines and Procedures 2017,”https://www.pmprb-cepmb.gc.ca/view.asp?ccid=492&lang=en. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/100953 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 台灣自1995年實施全民健康保險制度以來,成功達成「全民納保、平等給付」之初衷,顯著提升醫療可近性與民眾滿意度。然而,隨著人口快速老化、少子化趨勢加劇,以及醫療科技的進步,健保制度逐漸面臨財務壓力與結構性挑戰。健保財源長期依賴保費收入,公共醫療支出占GDP比率偏低,加上新藥給付延宕與總額預算副作用等問題,均對制度永續性構成威脅。本研究旨在探討台灣全民健康保險制度之永續發展,並針對「財源不足」、「新藥審查與核價機制」、「總額預算制度副作用」三大核心議題進行分析。
研究方法採文獻分析與深度訪談並行。文獻部分蒐集台灣健保發展歷程、國內外相關研究及英國、加拿大、日本、南韓、澳洲等先進國家的制度比較;訪談部分則針對製藥產業高階主管、醫療院所醫師及醫藥相關學者共11位專家,蒐集其對我國健保制度現況與改革方向的專業見解。 研究結果顯示:第一,台灣健保財源結構過於單一,政府公共支出占比下降,應建立長期調整機制並提高財政挹注比重,使公共醫療支出逐步接近OECD平均水準。第二,現行新藥審查與核價制度偏重成本控制,導致藥價低估與給付時程延宕,建議引入健康科技評估(HTA)與風險分攤機制,並設置創新藥基金以保障病人可近性與鼓勵產業創新。第三,總額預算制度雖能有效控費,但長期壓縮醫療點值,促使醫療機構仰賴藥價差維持營運,形成「以藥養醫」與「藥價黑洞」現象,建議導入成果導向支付(Pay for Performance)及合理化診療報酬,以改善制度扭曲。 綜上所述,健保制度永續發展需兼顧財務穩定、醫療品質與公平性。本研究建議政府除強化中長期財務規劃與透明治理外,亦應深化跨部會協作,推動以價值為導向之支付制度,確保全民健康保險在財政可負擔下持續提供高品質醫療服務,達成「全民可近、永續經營」之目標。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Since the implementation of Taiwan’s National Health Insurance (NHI) in 1995, the system has successfully achieved its goals of universal coverage and equal access to medical services, significantly improving healthcare accessibility and public satisfaction. However, Taiwan’s NHI now faces severe financial and structural challenges due to rapid population aging, declining fertility, and medical technology advancement. The system’s overreliance on premium income, the declining share of public health expenditure in GDP, prolonged delays in new drug reimbursement, and side effects of the global budgeting mechanism have all threatened its long-term sustainability.
This study aims to explore the sustainability of Taiwan’s NHI system, focusing on three key issues: (1) insufficient funding resources, (2) the review and pricing mechanisms for new drugs, and (3) the unintended consequences of the global budgeting system. The research adopts both literature review and in-depth interviews. The literature analysis covers Taiwan’s NHI development, domestic research, and comparative studies of advanced health insurance systems in the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. The interview component involves eleven experts, including senior executives from the pharmaceutical industry, physicians from major hospitals, and academic scholars in medical and health policy fields. The findings indicate that: Financial insufficiency - Taiwan’s NHI revenue structure is overly dependent on premiums, with declining public financial input. The study suggests establishing a long-term fiscal adjustment mechanism and increasing the proportion of government funding to gradually align public health expenditure with the OECD average. New drug reimbursement and pricing - The current cost-centered approach undervalues innovation and causes delays in patient access. The study recommends incorporating Health Technology Assessment (HTA), risk-sharing mechanisms, and a dedicated innovation drug fund to enhance accessibility and promote medical innovation. Global budgeting distortions - Although effective for cost control, the system has compressed medical service payments, leading to “drug margin dependence” and distorted hospital operations. The study proposes outcome-based payment models and rationalized physician fee adjustments to correct structural imbalances. In conclusion, ensuring the sustainability of Taiwan’s NHI requires a balance between financial stability, service quality, and fairness. The government should strengthen medium- to long-term fiscal planning, enhance transparency, and promote value-based payment reforms to maintain a high-quality and financially sustainable universal healthcare system. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-11-26T16:14:06Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-11-26T16:14:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌 i
中文摘要 ii 英文摘要 iii 目次 v 圖次 vi 表次 vii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節、研究背景與動機 1 第二節、研究問題與目的 5 第三節、研究架構與流程 6 第二章 文獻探討 7 第一節、台灣健保制度的發展 7 第二節、國內相關研究 10 第三節、先進國家健康保險及藥品制度 13 第三章 研究設計 17 第一節、研究方法 17 第二節、訪談綱要 19 第四章 業界、醫界和學界之專家訪談分析 25 第一節、製藥界專家觀點與建議 25 第二節、醫界專家觀點與建議 27 第三節、醫藥相關學系學者 29 第四節、小結 31 第五章 結論與建議 34 第一節、研究結論 34 第二節、研究建議 35 參考文獻 39 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 全民健康保險 | - |
| dc.subject | 財源永續 | - |
| dc.subject | 新藥核價 | - |
| dc.subject | 總額預算制度 | - |
| dc.subject | 健康科技評估 | - |
| dc.subject | National health insurance | - |
| dc.subject | Financial sustainability | - |
| dc.subject | Drug pricing | - |
| dc.subject | Global budgeting | - |
| dc.subject | Health technology assessment | - |
| dc.title | 我國健康保險制度永續性之研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The Research on the Sustainability of Taiwan’s National Health Insurance System | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 114-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | 劉心才 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | Hsin-Tsai Liu | en |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 謝昇峯;林嘉薇 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Sheng-Feng Hsieh;Chia-Wei Lin | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 全民健康保險,財源永續新藥核價總額預算制度健康科技評估 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | National health insurance,Financial sustainabilityDrug pricingGlobal budgetingHealth technology assessment | en |
| dc.relation.page | 43 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202504607 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-10-22 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 碩士在職專班會計與管理決策組 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | N/A | - |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 會計與管理決策組 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-114-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 2.46 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。
