改革“发展中”卫生系统:坦桑尼亚、墨西哥和美国。

Dov Chernichovsky, Gabriel Martinez, Nelly Aguilera
{"title":"改革“发展中”卫生系统:坦桑尼亚、墨西哥和美国。","authors":"Dov Chernichovsky,&nbsp;Gabriel Martinez,&nbsp;Nelly Aguilera","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Tanzania, Mexico, and the United States are at vastly different points on the economic development scale. Yet, their health systems can be classified as \"developing\": they do not live up to their potential, considering the resources available to them. The three, representing many others, share a common structural deficiency: a segregated health care system that cannot achieve its basic goals, the optimal health of its people, and their possible satisfaction with the system. Segregation follows and signifies first and foremost the lack of financial integration in the system that prevents it from serving its goals through the objectives of equity, cost containment and sustainability, efficient production of care and health, and choice.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The chapter contrasts the nature of the developing health care system with the common goals', objectives, and principles of the Emerging Paradigm (EP) in developed, integrated--yet decentralized--systems. In this context, the developing health care system is defined by its structural deficiencies, and reform proposals are outlined.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>In spite of the vast differences amongst the three countries, their health care systems share strikingly similar features. At least 50% of their total funding sources are private. The systems comprise exclusive vertically integrated, yet segregated, \"silos\" that handle all systemic functions. These reflect and promote wide variations in health insurance coverage and levels of benefits--substantial portions of their populations are without adequate coverage altogether; a considerable lack of income protection from medical spending; an inability to formalize and follow a coherent health policy; a lack of financial discipline that threatens sustainability and overall efficiency; inefficient production of care and health; and an dissatisfied population. These features are often promoted by the state, using tax money, and donors.</p><p><strong>Policy implications: </strong>The situation can be rectified by (a) \"centralizing\"--at any level of development and resource availability--health system finance around a set package of core medical benefits that is made available to the entire population and (b) \"decentralizing\" consumption and provision of care. The first serves equity and cost containment and sustainability. The second supports efficiency and client satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Originality/value of chapter: </strong>The chapter views commonly discussed problems of the health care system--a lack of insurance coverage and income protection--as symptoms of a large problem: health system segregation.</p>","PeriodicalId":79553,"journal":{"name":"Advances in health economics and health services research","volume":"21 ","pages":"313-38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reforming \\\"developing\\\" health systems: Tanzania, Mexico, and the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Dov Chernichovsky,&nbsp;Gabriel Martinez,&nbsp;Nelly Aguilera\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Tanzania, Mexico, and the United States are at vastly different points on the economic development scale. Yet, their health systems can be classified as \\\"developing\\\": they do not live up to their potential, considering the resources available to them. The three, representing many others, share a common structural deficiency: a segregated health care system that cannot achieve its basic goals, the optimal health of its people, and their possible satisfaction with the system. Segregation follows and signifies first and foremost the lack of financial integration in the system that prevents it from serving its goals through the objectives of equity, cost containment and sustainability, efficient production of care and health, and choice.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The chapter contrasts the nature of the developing health care system with the common goals', objectives, and principles of the Emerging Paradigm (EP) in developed, integrated--yet decentralized--systems. In this context, the developing health care system is defined by its structural deficiencies, and reform proposals are outlined.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>In spite of the vast differences amongst the three countries, their health care systems share strikingly similar features. At least 50% of their total funding sources are private. The systems comprise exclusive vertically integrated, yet segregated, \\\"silos\\\" that handle all systemic functions. These reflect and promote wide variations in health insurance coverage and levels of benefits--substantial portions of their populations are without adequate coverage altogether; a considerable lack of income protection from medical spending; an inability to formalize and follow a coherent health policy; a lack of financial discipline that threatens sustainability and overall efficiency; inefficient production of care and health; and an dissatisfied population. These features are often promoted by the state, using tax money, and donors.</p><p><strong>Policy implications: </strong>The situation can be rectified by (a) \\\"centralizing\\\"--at any level of development and resource availability--health system finance around a set package of core medical benefits that is made available to the entire population and (b) \\\"decentralizing\\\" consumption and provision of care. The first serves equity and cost containment and sustainability. The second supports efficiency and client satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Originality/value of chapter: </strong>The chapter views commonly discussed problems of the health care system--a lack of insurance coverage and income protection--as symptoms of a large problem: health system segregation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in health economics and health services research\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"313-38\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in health economics and health services research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in health economics and health services research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:坦桑尼亚、墨西哥和美国在经济发展规模上存在巨大差异。然而,它们的卫生系统可以被归类为“发展中”:考虑到它们所拥有的资源,它们没有充分发挥其潜力。这三个国家代表了许多其他国家,它们都有一个共同的结构性缺陷:隔离的卫生保健系统无法实现其基本目标,人民的最佳健康状况,以及他们对该系统的可能满意度。隔离首先意味着该系统缺乏财政一体化,这阻碍了它通过公平、成本控制和可持续性、有效提供护理和保健以及选择等目标来实现其目标。方法:本章对比了发展中的卫生保健系统的性质与共同的目标,目的和原则的新兴范式(EP)在发达的,集成的-但分散-系统。在此背景下,发展中的卫生保健系统被其结构性缺陷所定义,并概述了改革建议。研究发现:尽管这三个国家之间存在巨大差异,但它们的医疗保健系统有着惊人的相似之处。他们的总资金来源中至少有50%是私人的。这些系统包括专有的垂直集成,但又隔离的“筒仓”,处理所有系统功能。这反映并促进了健康保险覆盖范围和福利水平的巨大差异————它们人口的很大一部分完全没有充分的保险;在医疗支出方面缺乏收入保障;无法制定和执行连贯的卫生政策;缺乏财务纪律,威胁到可持续性和整体效率;护理和保健生产效率低下;以及不满的民众。这些功能通常是由国家利用税收资金和捐助者推动的。政策影响:这种情况可以通过(a)加以纠正在任何发展水平和资源可得性水平上,将卫生系统资金围绕一套向全体人口提供的核心医疗福利进行“集中”;“分散”消费和提供护理。前者有利于公平、成本控制和可持续性。第二部分支持效率和客户满意度。本章的原创性/价值:本章将卫生保健系统中经常讨论的问题——缺乏保险覆盖和收入保障——视为一个大问题的症状:卫生系统隔离。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reforming "developing" health systems: Tanzania, Mexico, and the United States.

Objective: Tanzania, Mexico, and the United States are at vastly different points on the economic development scale. Yet, their health systems can be classified as "developing": they do not live up to their potential, considering the resources available to them. The three, representing many others, share a common structural deficiency: a segregated health care system that cannot achieve its basic goals, the optimal health of its people, and their possible satisfaction with the system. Segregation follows and signifies first and foremost the lack of financial integration in the system that prevents it from serving its goals through the objectives of equity, cost containment and sustainability, efficient production of care and health, and choice.

Method: The chapter contrasts the nature of the developing health care system with the common goals', objectives, and principles of the Emerging Paradigm (EP) in developed, integrated--yet decentralized--systems. In this context, the developing health care system is defined by its structural deficiencies, and reform proposals are outlined.

Findings: In spite of the vast differences amongst the three countries, their health care systems share strikingly similar features. At least 50% of their total funding sources are private. The systems comprise exclusive vertically integrated, yet segregated, "silos" that handle all systemic functions. These reflect and promote wide variations in health insurance coverage and levels of benefits--substantial portions of their populations are without adequate coverage altogether; a considerable lack of income protection from medical spending; an inability to formalize and follow a coherent health policy; a lack of financial discipline that threatens sustainability and overall efficiency; inefficient production of care and health; and an dissatisfied population. These features are often promoted by the state, using tax money, and donors.

Policy implications: The situation can be rectified by (a) "centralizing"--at any level of development and resource availability--health system finance around a set package of core medical benefits that is made available to the entire population and (b) "decentralizing" consumption and provision of care. The first serves equity and cost containment and sustainability. The second supports efficiency and client satisfaction.

Originality/value of chapter: The chapter views commonly discussed problems of the health care system--a lack of insurance coverage and income protection--as symptoms of a large problem: health system segregation.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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