580 likes | 790 Views
HEALTH SYSTEMS I. Health care systemsWhat impact does a country's health care system have upon its health?Possibly very little!Most comprehensive attempt to assess strengths and weaknesses of different countries' health care systems was World Health Report (WHR) 2000 produced by World Health O
E N D
1. ME33ES MEDICINE AND ECONOMICSHEALTH SYSTEMS I Summary
Health care systems
India
US current health system
US the Obama reforms
France
Social insurance systems versus tax financed systems
2. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Health care systems
What impact does a countrys health care system have upon its health?
Possibly very little!
Most comprehensive attempt to assess strengths and weaknesses of different countries health care systems was World Health Report (WHR) 2000 produced by World Health Organisation: http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/
3. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Countries investigated
Japan (tops several WHR tables) and Sierra Leone (bottom of most WHR tables)
Countries which illustrate different types of health care system (India, UK, France, US)
Canada and Cuba (US, Canada, France, UK and Cuba all feature in Michael Moores film Sicko, www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7pCaK0aASEyoutube)
4. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Disability adjusted life expectancy is measure of how long people live on average but adjusted for the time lived in a state of ill health
6. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Most of the countries at the top of the table are high income countries but Cuba is a notable exception
Rankings reflect much more than the health care system including such factors as diet (Japan) and the effects of war/civil war (Sierra Leone)
7. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Impact of the health care system upon a countrys health:
How much is spent
How health care is financed
How well the health care system is organised: both how efficiently and how well it addresses health priorities
How much is spent is the least important of these three
9. HEALTH SYSTEMS I US spends 34 times as much per person on health care as Cuba but on average Americans only have 19 months more of healthy life than Cubans
10. HEALTH SYSTEMS I World Health Report judges performance of a health system against five goals (combined in a single index):
Health of the population
Inequality in health
Responsiveness (non health aspects of care)
Inequality in responsiveness
Fair financing
11. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Responsiveness
Respect for persons
Respect for peoples dignity
Confidentiality
Autonomy
Client orientation
Prompt attention
Amenities
Access to social support networks
Choice of provider
13. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Again, only very rough correspondence between how well a health care system performs and a countrys wealth or how much it spends on health care
14. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Financing health care
Out of pocket payments (paying for health care at the point of use); India
Private insurance (voluntary health insurance by employers or individuals); US
Social insurance (government makes health insurance payments compulsory); France
Tax financing (government pays for health care from tax revenues); UK
(In many poor countries, health care is financed by international donors, aid provided by rich countries; Sierra Leone)
15. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Wealth can ensure good health care systems if:
There is universal coverage
People are not denied health care because of inability to pay
Health care bills do not lead to people being impoverished
Key measure is how much of total health care spending is public spending
17. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Uniquely among rich countries, the US fails to maintain a universal health care system and exposes its citizens to financial risk because of high health care bills
Where Cuba succeeds and India and (more understandably) Sierra Leone fail is in maintaining a comprehensive public health care system
18. HEALTH SYSTEMS I All countries have mixed health care systems although often with one dominant method of financing
Out of pocket payments (India)
Private insurance (US)
Social insurance (France)
19. HEALTH SYSTEMS I India
75% of spending on health care in India are out of pocket payments
People buy health care from private health care providers just like buying mangos from a farmer in the market
Result is that often the poor cannot afford health care
Out of pocket payments provide no protection against potentially catastrophic health care bills
20. HEALTH SYSTEMS I A quarter of Indians who have to go into hospital for care are driven into poverty by the costs of care
In theory, all Indians have access to public health care but coverage and quality is variable due to:
low budgets
poor management
irregular supplies of drugs and equipment
problems in retention of health professionals
corruption
21. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Private sector accounts for 75% of health workers, 68% of hospitals, 37% of beds
1.3 million businesses, employing 2.2 million people, from hospital doctors to traditional healers
22. HEALTH SYSTEMS I US current health system
Private insurance is basis of health system in just a few countries including US (and, before 1994, Switzerland)
US system is dominated by private insurance but it is not compulsory
Employer sponsored insurance is most common
23. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Individual insurance, where people pay their own premium, covers the self employed and people who cannot obtain insurance through their employer
Insurance plans are administered by private companies
Health care benefits vary widely; some insurance plans cover drugs, others do not
24. HEALTH SYSTEMS I To the surprise of some Americans, there is substantial public funding of health care already
Medicare is a tax financed federal programme for people of 65 or over but many gaps in coverage (dental, hearing, eyesight care)
Medicaid covers low income families but measure of eligible income is set very low
25. HEALTH SYSTEMS I For Obama, main problems of US system include:
Lack of security that insured people will receive good care: denial of cover for pre-existing conditions
Lack of coverage of many Americans: US is only rich country without universal coverage
High and increasing costs of care: over half of personal bankruptcies in US are due to health care bills
30. HEALTH SYSTEMS I US the Obama reforms
Obama reforms preserve the fundamentals of US system but seek to follow Switzerland in 1994 in moving towards:
Making insurance compulsory
Subsidising the premiums of low income groups
Forbidding insurance companies to deny cover
31. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Extremely bitter debate culminated in passage of Affordable Health Care for America Act in March 2010 (although not a single Republican voted for it)
Obama and Democratic Party was forced to drop idea of a public health insurance alternative to the private insurance companies
Large number of further concessions such as insurance cover for abortion
32. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Act prohibits insurers from refusing coverage or charging different rates according to patients' medical histories
Establishes minimum standards for qualified health insurance plans
Requires Americans to have health insurance coverage (or pay a fine)
33. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Subsidy to low and middle income Americans to help buy insurance
Expansion of Medicaid to include more low income Americans
Requires most employers to provide coverage for their workers or pay a surtax on their worker's wages
Tax credits to help small businesses provide insurance cover
34. HEALTH SYSTEMS I http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/index.php
Still not clear what reforms will actually take place or what effect they will have
www.qmu.ac.uk/iihd
35. HEALTH SYSTEMS I France
France has a social health insurance system
Social insurance systems are ones in which there are compulsory income-based health insurance contributions
First system established in Germany by Bismarck
Some systems such as UK (national insurance contributions), Sweden and Finland have remnants of social insurance
36. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Since 1994 reforms, Switzerland is usually classified as a social health insurance system
Social insurance systems are not true insurance systems in which the benefit package is defined by the insurance policy
Benefits are not linked directly to contributions but are defined by need
Social insurance systems are thus explicitly redistributive: from rich to poor and from well to ill
37. HEALTH SYSTEMS I There are five health insurance funds in France covering: employees (much the largest fund), farmers, other self employed, civil servants and students
Each of the funds covers the family of the insured person
Insurance cover for those who are not members of any of the five funds is met by the government from general taxation
38. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Employees have a health insurance contribution deducted from their pay at 7.5% of income; employers contribute 12.8%
French people pay for most services and drugs up front but can then reclaim a proportion of the payment
The copayment (the residual which cannot be reclaimed) can be large: 20% for hospital care and 30% for consultations with a doctor
39. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Reimbursements are meant to be prompt (within two weeks) but are often not
System can be complex and expensive
Concerns that some people may not seek care because of the copayments and the delays in reimbursement
40. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Social insurance systems versus tax financed systems
Comparison of ideal types or pure systems although such systems do not exist in practice
Differences between social insurance and tax financing:
Earmarking
Choice
Providers
Spending levels
Similarities:
Equity
Rationing
42. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Earmarking
Earmarking (hypothecation) refers to whether funds can only be used for a specific purpose
Social insurance is usually based on an earmarked fund but in tax financed system, health care has to compete with other demands on how taxes be spent
Earmarking contributes to certainty and stability but it also means it will be less likely that health care budgets are topped up when there is pressure on resources
43. HEALTH SYSTEMS I There is evidence of greater willingness to contribute wherever there is earmarking and the use of funds is known
Earmarking is one of the possible reasons why there tends to be greater satisfaction with health care provision in countries with social insurance
45. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Choice
In social (and private) insurance systems there tends to be greater choice of providers than with tax financing
People can choose the health facilities (and often individual doctors) where they will be treated, from a list of approved providers
Choice is valued in itself by many
Presence of choice also contributes to satisfaction with the health service and feeling it is responsive to public needs and preferences
46. Patients access to providers
47. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Providers
Social insurance and tax financed systems differ in relationship between financing of health care and institutions (hospitals, clinics, doctors) which provide care
Tax financed systems most often follow an integrated model: the financer is the provider
Hospitals and clinics are publicly owned and managed; doctors and other health care professionals are employed by government
48. HEALTH SYSTEMS I In social insurance systems, there is generally separation of the functions of financing and providing care: contract model
The social insurance fund purchases services from independent providers corresponds to third party payer model in private insurance
Social insurance payments are not usually collected directly by government but by quasi public bodies which are regulated rather than controlled by government
49. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Spending levels
Spending levels tend to be higher under social insurance systems (% of GDP, 2002)
Germany 10.9
Belgium 9.1
France 9.7
Netherlands 8.8
UK 7.1
Denmark 6.5
Sweden 7.9
New Zealand 7.7
51. HEALTH SYSTEMS I In some ways, surprising since contract models should be associated with lower costs
Providers are paid on the basis of work done not by global budgets
However, social insurance systems are less effective at combating demands upon health care resources (moral hazard)
52. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Greater acceptability of health insurance contributions over taxes
Role of social insurance funds, semi independent of government (third party payer problem)
In addition, administrative costs tend to be higher under social insurance (France is exception)
54. HEALTH SYSTEMS I
Unresolved debate whether higher expenditure under social insurance reflects:
better quality care and more generous benefit packages
and/or
(relatively) inefficient, high cost services
55. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Equity
Social health insurance and tax financing systems tend to be similar in their strong emphasis on equity
Access to health care is not determined by ability to pay
56. HEALTH SYSTEMS I Rationing
Fairly explicit, mainly non price rationing is virtually inevitable under both social insurance and tax financing
In Germany, planning mechanisms are used primarily to ration resources
Benefit package which all providers are obliged to meet is planned according to available resources
Copayments for drugs are small, 5% of costs
57. HEALTH SYSTEMS I In France, price mechanisms are used to a greater extent to ration health care spending
Traditionally, tax financed systems such as the NHS have relied upon waiting as the main rationing mechanism
More recently, with the creation of NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence), there has been a move towards the German model, defining what the NHS will pay for