当今高收入国家在医疗保健领域的经济学知识和应用:比利时案例。

Q2 Medicine
Journal of market access & health policy Pub Date : 2024-09-04 eCollection Date: 2024-09-01 DOI:10.3390/jmahp12030021
Baudouin Standaert, Désirée Vandenberghe, Mark P Connolly, Johan Hellings
{"title":"当今高收入国家在医疗保健领域的经济学知识和应用:比利时案例。","authors":"Baudouin Standaert, Désirée Vandenberghe, Mark P Connolly, Johan Hellings","doi":"10.3390/jmahp12030021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Healthcare is a huge business sector in many countries, focusing on the social function of delivering quality health when people develop illness. The system is essentially financed by public funds based on the solidarity principle. With a large financial outlay, the sector must use economic evaluation methods to achieve better efficiency. The objective of our study was to evaluate and to understand how health economics is used today, taking Belgium as an example of a high-income country. The evaluation started with a historical view of healthcare development and ended with potential projections for its future. A literature review focused on country-specific evaluation reports to identify the health economic methods used, with a search for potential gaps. The first results indicated that Belgium in 2021 devoted 11% of its GDP, 17% of its total tax revenue, and 30% of the national Social Security Fund to health-related activities, totalizing EUR 55.5 billion spending. The main health economic method used was a cost-effectiveness analysis linked to budget impact, assigning reimbursable monetary values to new products becoming available. However, these evaluation methods only impacted at most 20% of the money circulating in healthcare. The remaining 80% was subject to financial regulations (70%) and budgeting (10%), which could use many other techniques of an economic analysis. The evaluation indicated two potentially important changes in health economic use in Belgium. One was an increased focus on budgeting with plans, time frames, and quantified treatment objectives on specific disease problems. Economic models with simulations are very supportive in those settings. The other was the application of constrained optimization methods, which may become the new standard of practice when switching from fee-for-service to pay-per-performance as promoted by value-based healthcare and value-based health management. This economic refocusing to a more constrained approach may help to keep the healthcare system sustainable and affordable in the face of the many future challenges including ageing, climate change, migration, pandemics, logistical limitations, and financial instability.</p>","PeriodicalId":73811,"journal":{"name":"Journal of market access & health policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11417786/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Knowledge and Application of Economics in Healthcare in a High-Income Country Today: The Case of Belgium.\",\"authors\":\"Baudouin Standaert, Désirée Vandenberghe, Mark P Connolly, Johan Hellings\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jmahp12030021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Healthcare is a huge business sector in many countries, focusing on the social function of delivering quality health when people develop illness. The system is essentially financed by public funds based on the solidarity principle. With a large financial outlay, the sector must use economic evaluation methods to achieve better efficiency. The objective of our study was to evaluate and to understand how health economics is used today, taking Belgium as an example of a high-income country. The evaluation started with a historical view of healthcare development and ended with potential projections for its future. A literature review focused on country-specific evaluation reports to identify the health economic methods used, with a search for potential gaps. The first results indicated that Belgium in 2021 devoted 11% of its GDP, 17% of its total tax revenue, and 30% of the national Social Security Fund to health-related activities, totalizing EUR 55.5 billion spending. The main health economic method used was a cost-effectiveness analysis linked to budget impact, assigning reimbursable monetary values to new products becoming available. However, these evaluation methods only impacted at most 20% of the money circulating in healthcare. The remaining 80% was subject to financial regulations (70%) and budgeting (10%), which could use many other techniques of an economic analysis. The evaluation indicated two potentially important changes in health economic use in Belgium. One was an increased focus on budgeting with plans, time frames, and quantified treatment objectives on specific disease problems. Economic models with simulations are very supportive in those settings. The other was the application of constrained optimization methods, which may become the new standard of practice when switching from fee-for-service to pay-per-performance as promoted by value-based healthcare and value-based health management. This economic refocusing to a more constrained approach may help to keep the healthcare system sustainable and affordable in the face of the many future challenges including ageing, climate change, migration, pandemics, logistical limitations, and financial instability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of market access & health policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11417786/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of market access & health policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp12030021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of market access & health policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp12030021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在许多国家,医疗保健是一个庞大的商业部门,其重点是在人们患病时提供优质医疗服务的社会职能。该系统的资金主要来自基于团结原则的公共资金。由于财政支出巨大,该部门必须使用经济评估方法来提高效率。我们研究的目的是以比利时这个高收入国家为例,评估和了解当今卫生经济学的应用情况。评估以医疗保健发展的历史回顾开始,以对其未来的潜在预测结束。文献审查的重点是各国的评估报告,以确定所使用的卫生经济学方法,并寻找潜在的差距。初步结果显示,2021 年比利时将 11% 的国内生产总值、17% 的税收总额和 30% 的国家社会保障基金用于与医疗相关的活动,总支出达 555 亿欧元。所使用的主要卫生经济方法是与预算影响相关的成本效益分析,为新产品的上市分配可报销的货币价值。然而,这些评估方法最多只能影响 20% 的医疗保健流通资金。其余 80% 的资金受制于财务条例(70%)和预算编制(10%),可以使用许多其他经济分析技术。评估结果表明,比利时在卫生经济应用方面有两个潜在的重要变化。一是更加注重预算编制,包括计划、时间框架和针对具体疾病的量化治疗目标。在这种情况下,模拟经济模型非常有帮助。另一种是应用约束优化方法,这可能会成为从按服务收费转向按绩效付费的新实践标准,正如价值医疗和价值健康管理所提倡的那样。面对未来的诸多挑战,包括老龄化、气候变化、移民、大流行病、后勤限制和金融不稳定,这种将经济重点转向更具约束性的方法可能有助于保持医疗保健系统的可持续性和可负担性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Knowledge and Application of Economics in Healthcare in a High-Income Country Today: The Case of Belgium.

Healthcare is a huge business sector in many countries, focusing on the social function of delivering quality health when people develop illness. The system is essentially financed by public funds based on the solidarity principle. With a large financial outlay, the sector must use economic evaluation methods to achieve better efficiency. The objective of our study was to evaluate and to understand how health economics is used today, taking Belgium as an example of a high-income country. The evaluation started with a historical view of healthcare development and ended with potential projections for its future. A literature review focused on country-specific evaluation reports to identify the health economic methods used, with a search for potential gaps. The first results indicated that Belgium in 2021 devoted 11% of its GDP, 17% of its total tax revenue, and 30% of the national Social Security Fund to health-related activities, totalizing EUR 55.5 billion spending. The main health economic method used was a cost-effectiveness analysis linked to budget impact, assigning reimbursable monetary values to new products becoming available. However, these evaluation methods only impacted at most 20% of the money circulating in healthcare. The remaining 80% was subject to financial regulations (70%) and budgeting (10%), which could use many other techniques of an economic analysis. The evaluation indicated two potentially important changes in health economic use in Belgium. One was an increased focus on budgeting with plans, time frames, and quantified treatment objectives on specific disease problems. Economic models with simulations are very supportive in those settings. The other was the application of constrained optimization methods, which may become the new standard of practice when switching from fee-for-service to pay-per-performance as promoted by value-based healthcare and value-based health management. This economic refocusing to a more constrained approach may help to keep the healthcare system sustainable and affordable in the face of the many future challenges including ageing, climate change, migration, pandemics, logistical limitations, and financial instability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信