DOCSLIB.ORG

Health Care Systems in the Eu a Comparative Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Health Care Systems in the Eu a Comparative Study EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR RESEARCH WORKING PAPER HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS IN THE EU A COMPARATIVE STUDY Public Health and Consumer Protection Series SACO 101 EN This publication is available in the following languages: EN (original) DE FR The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. Publisher: EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT L-2929 LUXEMBOURG Author: Dr.med. Elke Jakubowski, MSc. HPPF, Advisor in Public Health Policy Department of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Medical School Hannover Co-author: Dr.med. Reinhard Busse, M.P.H., Department of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Medical School Hannover Editor: Graham R. Chambers BA Directorate-General for Research Division for Policies on Social Affairs, Women, Health and Culture Tel.: (00 352) 4300-23957 Fax: (00 352) 4300-27720 e-mail: [email protected] WITH SPECIAL GRATITUDE TO: James Kahan, Panos Kanavos, Julio Bastida-Lopez, Elias Mossialos, Miriam Wiley, Franco Sassi, Tore Schersten, Juha Teperi for their helpful comments and reviews of earlier drafts of the country chapters, and Manfred Huber for additional explanatory remarks on OECD Health Data. The manuscript was completed in May 1998. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR RESEARCH WORKING PAPER HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS IN THE EU A COMPARATIVE STUDY Public Health and Consumer Protection Series SACO 101 EN 11-1998 Health Care Systems CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 5 PART ONE: A Comparative Outline of the Health Care Systems of the EU Member States ......................................... 7 Framework...................................................... 9 Need and Demand for Health Care .................................. 11 Finance and Organisation of Health Care ............................. 18 Health Care Resources and Utilisation ............................... 23 Current Issues in Health Care ...................................... 27 PART TWO: The Health care Systems of the Individual Member States ............ 29 Austria ........................................................ 31 Belgium....................................................... 37 Denmark....................................................... 43 Finland........................................................ 49 France......................................................... 55 Germany....................................................... 63 Greece ........................................................ 71 Ireland ........................................................ 79 Italy .......................................................... 85 Luxembourg .................................................... 91 Netherlands .................................................... 97 Portugal ...................................................... 105 Spain ........................................................ 111 Sweden....................................................... 117 United Kingdom ................................................ 123 Countries at-a-glance............................................ 129 GLOSSARY .............................................................. 131 REFERENCES ............................................................ 135 PE 167.403 Health Care Systems INTRODUCTION The following report provides essential facts on health and health care in the 15 EU Member States. This new study of the health care systems of the 15 European Union (EU) Member States replaces two existing studies carried out in 1990 and 1993. The 1991 Maastricht Treaty gave the Union new competences in public health and more scope for international cooperation. Joint action with the Member States was identified for health promotion and health protection, the subsidising of medical and health policy research, and the establishment of international information systems. The Commission has already developed specific policies in fields such as AIDS, tobacco and alcohol abuse, and environmental causes of ill-health. The 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam provides for a new direction of Community action towards illness and diseases, and alleviating sources of danger to human health. The single European market and increasing migration within the Union are encouraging further policy convergence and new routes for the exchange of medical technology, health services and manpower resources. However, health policy-making is firmly guided by the principle of subsidiarity. The harmonisation of national laws is specifically excluded in Article 129 of the European Union Treaty. Health care systems stem from specific political, historical, cultural and socio-economic traditions. As a result, the organisational arrangements for health care differ considerably between Member States - as does the allocation of capital and human resources. The principal forms of health care organisation in the European Union are the tax-financed national health service systems and those operating with social insurance in which insurance funds may be independent of the government. However, this fundamental division between the systems is weakening. Countries such as the United Kingdom have opened up their NHS to internal competition to diversify supply and increase purchasing power. In contrast, in some traditional social insurance systems sickness funds are being merged and cost control increased on the part of the central government. This trend towards convergence is an attempt to retain the relative advantages of each system. Health care in the EU is at a cross-roads between challenges and opportunities. The Member States are facing common challenges in delivering equal, efficient and high quality health services at affordable cost in times when the amount of care to be delivered is starting to exceed the resource base. The demand for health care in Europe - as elsewhere among industrialised countries - is growing as a result of ageing populations and rising public expectations. The combination of demographic changes and technological developments increases the cost of provision. In consequence, the systems face the same problems of rationing services in order to cut costs owing to an increasing demand and a decreasing tax base to pay for that demand. At the same time, it is increasingly difficult to develop widely accepted health policies and maintain public consent. On the other hand, there are new opportunities to secure substantial improvements in health. There is growing interest in disease prevention and health promotion, clinical advances are enabling more 5 PE 167.403 Health Care Systems effective and efficient use of resources, and information on health and health care can be circulated more rapidly. Strategies employed by the Member States to meet the challenges and opportunities in health differ. For one thing they reflect substantial differences in the organisational framework in which health services are financed and delivered. Furthermore, definitions of what constitutes health and health care differ from country to country and different levels in health outcomes reflect different problems to be tackled. Each system has its own strengths and weaknesses and none of the systems provides a wholly successful solution. Hence each has something to learn from the experience of the other fourteen. In essence, the fifteen health care systems in the EU reflect a variety of different philosophies and approaches and retain their own peculiarities. Comparative studies of these systems aid the process of learning from one another to improve the health of all citizens of the Union. This report aims to provide up to date comparable information on health care systems in the European Union. Part 1 provides an overview of the key components of the health care systems studied and major trends in challenges to health and health care. Part 2 gives a detailed account of the health care system in each of the fifteen Member States. The synoptic table in the final section aims to summarise the main characteristics of the systems at a glance and the glossary provides for short definitions of technical terms. Methodological Issues Comparisons of data on health and health care between the Member States are generally hindered due to the different methods of data collection and interpretation employed. Thus, conclusions from comparative statistical data have to be drawn with great caution. This applies to information on health status, health care costs and resources, including their utilisation. The standardisation of data definitions and methods of data collection has not yet been fully realised, though subject to substantial international effort. In the detailed account of the health systems in the Member States, use is made of EU average values. These estimates are presented inside brackets to compare particular indicators. The fundamental source of statistical information used in this study is "OECD Health Data 98(97)", the data are those available at the end of May 1998. Whenever possible, OECD data have been compared with a second data source, most frequently derived from the WHO "Health for All" database. Differences between the two sources exceeding 10% are presented in angular brackets. This comparison with a second data source is limited because of a lack of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Group Work: Ghana's Pathway to Achieve Universal Health Coverage
    Health Care Financing module, 6-15 November 2019 Group work: Ghana’s pathway to achieve universal health coverage Reinhard Busse* Peter Agyei Bafour** * Department of Health Care Management (WHO Collaborating Centre for Health Systems Research and Management), Technische Universität Berlin, Germany & European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies ** School of Public Health, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana Group Work First 90 min (8:00-10:00): • Same groups as on Friday • 90 minutes group work – Discuss Ghana‘s pathway to UHC Second 90 min (10:30-12:30): • Present Ghanas pathway to UHC – 10 min presentation per group + 5 min discussion – 15 min general discussion and wrap-up 12 November 2019 Group work: pathways to UHC 2 Group task 1. Identify the most important challenges for the Ghana health system to reach UHC 2. Discuss the content of the lectures of the first week: what options are available to achieve UHC? And how can they be implemented (revenue generation, actors, functions, financial flow)? 3. Prepare a presentation (max. 10 slides): – Main challenges for UHC in Ghana: <3 slides – Options to achieve UHC: 2-3 slides – A pathway to achieve UHC: 3-4 slides – Conclusions: 1 slide 12 November 2019 Group work: pathways to UHC 3 The Ghana health system at a glance Collector of resources Third-party payer MoF MoH Development partners NHIA NHIA 2.5% of VAT (NHI levy), Contracts with formal sector: 2.5% SNIT accredited providers contribution, Small premiums (€1-7) MoH Population Provider NHIS members: 35-40% Choice of contracted providers 57% government (GHS), Uninsured (majority) 33% private, Out-of-pocket payments VHI (few) 7% non-for-profit 11 November 2019 From fragmented systems to UHC (CHAG, Muslim)4 NHIS revenue composition 11 November 2019 From fragmented systems to UHC 5 NHIS membership composition 11 November 2019 From fragmented systems to UHC 6 Road to UHC in Ghana – targets for 2030 11 November 2019 From fragmented systems to UHC 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Migrant Health in Italy: a Better Health Status Difficult to Maintain—Country
    Campostrini et al. Population Health Metrics (2019) 17:14 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-019-0194-8 RESEARCH Open Access Migrant health in Italy: a better health status difficult to maintain—country of origin and assimilation effects studied from the Italian risk factor surveillance data Stefano Campostrini1* , Giuliano Carrozzi2, Santino Severoni3, Maria Masocco4, Stefania Salmaso4, WHO Migration Health Programme, Office of the Regional Director, WHO Regional Office for Europe and the PASSI National Coordinating group Abstract Background: Many studies on migrant health have focused on aspects of morbidity and mortality, but very few approach the relevant issues of migrants’ health considering behavioral risk factors. Previous studies have often been limited methodologically because of sample size or lack of information on migrant country of origin. Information about risk factors is fundamental to direct any intervention, particularly with regard to non- communicable diseases that are leading causes of death and disease. Thus, the main focus of our analysis is the influence of country of origin and the assimilation process. Method: Utilizing a surveillance system that has been collecting over 30,000 interviews a year in Italy since 2008, we have studied migrants’ attitudes and behaviors by country of origin and by length of stay. Given 6 years of observation, we have obtained and analyzed 228,201 interviews of which over 9000 were migrants. Results: While migrants overall present similar conditions to native-born Italians, major differences appear when country of origin or length of stay is considered. Subgroups of migrants present substantially different behaviors, some much better than native-born Italians, some worse.
    [Show full text]
  • Full-Text Provided on Manchester Research Explorer Is the Author Accepted Manuscript Or Proof Version This May Differ from the Final Published Version
    The University of Manchester Research Moving Services out of hospital: Joining up General Practice and community services? Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA): Bramwell, D., Checkland, K., Allen, P., & Peckham, S. (2014). Moving Services out of hospital: Joining up General Practice and community services? Policy Research Unit in Commissioning and the Healthcare System Manchester Centre for Health Economics. Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on Manchester Research Explorer is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Proof version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Explorer are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Takedown policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please refer to the University of Manchester’s Takedown Procedures [http://man.ac.uk/04Y6Bo] or contact [email protected] providing relevant details, so we can investigate your claim. Download date:04. Oct. 2021 Moving Services out of hospital: Joining up General Practice and community services? August 2014 Research Team: Dr Donna Bramwell1 Dr Kath Checkland1 Dr Pauline Allen2 Professor Stephen Peckham3 Disclaimer: This research is funded by the Department of Health via the Policy Research Programme. The views expressed are those of the researchers and not necessarily those of the Department of Health.
    [Show full text]
  • Health in Italy in the 21St Century
    FOREWORD Rosy Bindi Minister of Health of Italy Roma, September 1999 This report provides the international community with an overall assessment of the state of health in Italy, as well as with the main developments of the Italian public health policy expected in the near future. It is intended as an important contribution towards the activities which, beginning with the 49th WHO Regional Committee in Florence, will be carried out in Europe with a view to defining health policies and strategies for the new century. This publication, which consists of two sections, illustrates the remarkable health achievements of Italy as regards both the control of diseases and their determinants, and the health care services. Overall, a clearly positive picture emerges, which is due not only to the environmental and cultural characteristics of Italy, but also to its health protection and care system which Italy intends to keep and indeed to improve in the interest of its citizens. The recent decisions taken in the framework of the reform of the National Health System in Italy intend to improve and strengthen the model of a universal health system based on equity and solidarity, which considers health as a fundamental human right irrespective of the economic, social and cultural conditions of each citizen. The new national health service guarantees, through its public resources, equal opportunities for accessing health services as well as homogenous and essential levels of health care throughout the country. Such a reorganization of the system has become necessary in order to meet new and growing demands for health within the framework of limited resources and with the understanding that equity in health is not only an ethical requirement, but also a rational and efficient way for allocating resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Healthcare Quality in Europe
    Cover_WHO_nr52.qxp_Mise en page 1 20/08/2019 16:31 Page 1 51 THE ROLE OF PUBLIC HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS IN ADDRESSING PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEMS IN EUROPE PUBLIC HEALTH IN ADDRESSING ORGANIZATIONS PUBLIC HEALTH THE ROLE OF Quality improvement initiatives take many forms, from the creation of standards for health Improving healthcare 53 professionals, health technologies and health facilities, to audit and feedback, and from fostering a patient safety culture to public reporting and paying for quality. For policy- makers who struggle to decide which initiatives to prioritise for investment, understanding quality in Europe Series the potential of different quality strategies in their unique settings is key. This volume, developed by the Observatory together with OECD, provides an overall conceptual Health Policy Health Policy framework for understanding and applying strategies aimed at improving quality of care. Characteristics, effectiveness and Crucially, it summarizes available evidence on different quality strategies and provides implementation of different strategies recommendations for their implementation. This book is intended to help policy-makers to understand concepts of quality and to support them to evaluate single strategies and combinations of strategies. Edited by Quality of care is a political priority and an important contributor to population health. This Reinhard Busse book acknowledges that "quality of care" is a broadly defined concept, and that it is often Niek Klazinga unclear how quality improvement strategies fit within a health system, and what their particular contribution can be. This volume elucidates the concepts behind multiple elements Dimitra Panteli of quality in healthcare policy (including definitions of quality, its dimensions, related activities, Wilm Quentin and targets), quality measurement and governance and situates it all in the wider context of health systems research.
    [Show full text]
  • The Health Care Systems of Germany and Switzerland
    WWS 597 Reinhardt THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS OF GERMANY AND SWITZERLAND Merely slouching towards “Regulated Competition” SOCIAL INSURANCE WITH PRIVATE PURCHASING THE FINANCING OF HEALTH CARE SOCIAL PRIVATE NO HEALTH INSURANCE INSURANCE OWNERSHIP INSURANCE OF PROVIDERS (Ability-to-Pay Financing) (Actuarially fair premiums) Single Multiple Non- For- Out-of- Payer Carriers Profit Profit pocket Government A D G J M Private, but non-profit B E H K N Private, and commercial C F I L O First, some comparative statistics International Comparison of Spending on Health, 1980–2007 Average spending on health per capita ($US PPP) 8000 7000 U.S. Switzerland 6000 Netherlands 5000 Germany 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Source: OECD Health Data 2009 (June 2009) cited in http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Chartbooks/2009/Multinational-Comparisons-of-Health-Systems- Data-2009.aspx International Comparison of Spending on Health, 1980–2007 Total expenditures on health as percent of GDP 16 15 U.S. 14 Switzerland 13 Germany 12 Netherlands 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 005 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2 2006 2007 Source: OECD Health Data 2009 (June 2009) cited in http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Chartbooks/2009/Multinational-Comparisons-of-Health-Systems- Data-2009.aspx Percentage of Population over Age 65 Percent with Influenza Immunization, 2007 80 77.5 77.0 73.5 69.0 70 66.7 64.9 64.3 63.7 58.9 60 56.0 56.0 50 40 30 20 10 0 a AUS* NETH UK FR US ITA CAN NZ OECD GER SWITZ Median * 2006 Source: OECD Health Data 2009 (June 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Health Systems in Transition : Sweden
    Health Systems in Transition Vol. 14 No. 5 2012 Sweden Health system review Anders Anell Anna H Glenngård Sherry Merkur Sherry Merkur (Editor) and Sarah Thomson were responsible for this HiT Editorial Board Editor in chief Elias Mossialos, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom Series editors Reinhard Busse, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Josep Figueras, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Martin McKee, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom Richard Saltman, Emory University, United States Editorial team Sara Allin, University of Toronto, Canada Jonathan Cylus, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Matthew Gaskins, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Cristina Hernández-Quevedo, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Marina Karanikolos, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Anna Maresso, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies David McDaid, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Sherry Merkur, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Philipa Mladovsky, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Dimitra Panteli, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Bernd Rechel, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Erica Richardson, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Anna Sagan, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Sarah Thomson, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Ewout van Ginneken, Berlin University of Technology, Germany International
    [Show full text]
  • Healthcare Seminar on Risk Equalisation & Regulation In
    Healthcare Seminar on Risk Equalisation & Regulation in Private Health Insurance 26th September 2018 Disclaimer The views expressed in these presentations are those of the presenter(s) and not necessarily of the Society of Actuaries in Ireland Agenda Time Title Speakers 9.00am – 9.10am Welcome & Opening Remarks Maurice Whyms 9.10am – 9.20am Official Opening Colm O’Reardon 9.20am – 10.00am Risk Equalisation: The Case of Ireland John Armstrong Overview & Future Challenges 10.00am – 10.45am Health-Based Risk Richard van Kleef Adjustment/Equalisation: International Experiences & Lessons Learned 10.45am – 11.15am Coffee Break 11.15am -12.00pm Risk Sharing in Plan Payments in Thomas McGuire Individual Health Insurance Markets & The Problem of Very High Costs Cases 12.00pm – 12.45pm Panel Discussion: “The Future of Risk Fiona Kiernan, James O ’Donoghue Equalisation in Ireland” & Eoin Dornan Moderator: Cathy Herbert 12.45pm Seminar Close Brendan McCarthy Welcome & Opening Remarks Maurice Whyms Official Opening Colm O’Reardon Risk Equalization and Risk Sharing in Regulated Health Insurance Markets John Armstrong - Thomas McGuire - Richard van Kleef Society of Actuaries in Ireland Seminar, September 26, 2018, Dublin Risk Equalization and Risk Sharing in Regulated Health Insurance Markets The Case of Ireland John Armstrong Society of Actuaries in Ireland Seminar, September 26, 2018, Dublin AGENDA 01 OVERVIEW 02 WHY REGULATE HEALTH INSURANCE? 03 TOOLS FOR REGULATION 04 REGULATION OF HEALTH INSURANCE IN IRELAND 05 IMPROVING RISK EQUALIZATION IN IRELAND 06 FRAMEWORK FOR HEALTH STATUS DATA COLLECTION 07 MOVING AHEAD FOR THE FUTURE 8 OVERVIEW 01 1.1 TERMINOLOGY • Important to understand key terminology differences from that readily used in Ireland Examples: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Care Facilities Hospitals Report on Training Visit
    SLOVAK UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY IN BRATISLAVA FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE INSTITUTE OF HOUSING AND CIVIC STRUCTURES HEALTH CARE FACILITIES HOSPITALS REPORT ON TRAINING VISIT In the frame work of the project No. SAMRS 2010/12/10 “Development of human resource capacity of Kabul polytechnic university” Funded by UÜtà|áÄtät ECDC cÜÉA Wtâw f{t{ YtÜâÖ December, 14, 2010 Prof. Daud Shah Faruq Health Care Facilities, Hospitals 2010/12/14 Acknowledgement: I Daud Shah Faruq professor of Kabul Poly Technic University The author of this article would like to express my appreciation for the Scientific Training Program to the Faculty of Architecture of the Slovak University of Technology and Slovak Aid program for financial support of this project. I would like to say my hearth thanks to Professor Arch. Mrs. Veronika Katradyova PhD, and professor Arch. Mr. stanislav majcher for their guidance and assistance during the all time of my training visit. My thank belongs also to Ing. Juma Haydary, PhD. the coordinator of the project SMARS/2010/10/01 in the frame work of which my visit was realized. Besides of this I would like to appreciate all professors and personnel of the faculty of Architecture for their good behaves and hospitality. Best regards cÜÉyA Wtâw ft{t{ YtÜâÖ December, 14, 2010 2 Prof. Daud Shah Faruq Health Care Facilities, Hospitals 2010/12/14 VISITING REPORT FROM FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE OF SLOVAK UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY IN BRATISLAVA This visit was organized for exchanging knowledge views and advices between us (professor of Kabul Poly Technic University and professors of this faculty). My visit was especially organized to the departments of Public Buildings and Interior design.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2010
    nd 22 Annual Conference Annual Report 2010 The major challenge since the 21st Annual Conference in December 2009 has been the national DHB MECA negotiations. Other challenges include promoting clinical leadership and engagement in DHBs consistent with the Time for Quality agreement and the In Good Hands policy statement, and the Government’s proposed amendments to the Employment Relations Act. The members of the National Executive are: President Jeff Brown (MidCentral) Vice President David Jones (Capital & Coast) Region 1 Judy Bent (Auckland) Himadri Seth (Waitemata) Region 2 John Bonning (Waikato) Paul Wilson (Bay of Plenty) Region 3 Hein Stander (Tairawhiti) - since June following the resignation of Torben Iversen in May Tim Frendin (Hawke’s Bay) Region 4 Brian Craig (Canterbury) John MacDonald (Canterbury) In May Torben Iversen resigned to take up a specialist position in Victoria (although still working one week every four in Tairawhiti). While technically eligible to continue on the National Executive practical considerations meant that he chose to resign. The Association is appreciative of the important contribution Dr Iversen made while on the Executive including bringing to the fore the position of members in smaller provincial DHBs, and for his role as Association representative in Tairawhiti. In June Hein Stander was elected unopposed in a by-election. The National Executive has met on four occasions in Wellington since the last Annual Conference, with a fifth meeting to be held immediately preceding this Conference. On 17-18 February the National Executive held its annual two day meeting to discuss strategic directions, the first day being informal. The informal day included: • Preparing for the national DHB MECA negotiations, including strategic direction and the draft claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Barriers to Accessing Health Care Among Undocumented Migrants in Sweden - a Principal Component Analysis Hatem Mona1, Lena M.C
    Mona et al. BMC Health Services Research (2021) 21:830 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06837-y RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Barriers to accessing health care among undocumented migrants in Sweden - a principal component analysis Hatem Mona1, Lena M.C. Andersson2*, Anders Hjern3,4 and Henry Ascher,1,5 Abstract Background: Undocumented migrants face many hardships in their everyday life such as poor living conditions, discrimination, and lack of access to healthcare. Previous studies have demonstrated considerable health care needs for psychiatric disorders as well as physical diseases. The aim of this paper was to find out the main barriers that undocumented migrants experience in accessing the Swedish healthcare system and to explore their relation with socioeconomic factors. Methods: A cross-sectional study with adult undocumented migrants was performed in the three largest cities of Sweden in 2014–2016. Sampling was done via informal networks. A socioeconomic questionnaire was constructed including 22 barriers to health care. Trained field workers conducted the interviews. A principal component analysis was conducted of all barriers to reveal central components. Then, Pearson’s chi-squared test was used to explore the characteristics of undocumented migrants experiencing barriers to care. Results: Two main components/barriers were extracted: “Fear of being taken by police/authorities”, which was related to fear of disclosure by or in relation to seeking health care, and “Structural and psychosocial factors” which was related to practical obstacles or shame of being ill. Lower age (74.1 % vs 56.0 %), lower level of education (75.0 % vs. 45.1 %), and having no children (70.3 % vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards the Design of a Process Management Approach for the Delivery of Unscheduled Urgent and Emergency Healthcare
    UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON FACULTY OF BUSINESS, LAW AND ARTS Southampton Business School Towards the Design of a Process Management Approach for the Delivery of Unscheduled Urgent and Emergency Healthcare by Ganye Kwah Driscole Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2017 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF BUSINESS, LAW AND ARTS Management Science Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy TOWARDS THE DESIGN OF A PROCESS MANAGEMENT APPROACH FOR THE DELIVERY OF UNSCHEDULED URGENT AND EMERGENCY HEALTHCARE Ganye Kwah Driscole Delivering effective urgent and emergency healthcare continues to challenge developed economies despite recent increased spending. The literature suggests that the current design of accident and emergency departments (A&E) does not reflect the process nature of the delivery of unscheduled urgent and emergency care. The research described in this thesis supports the development of a process model to strengthen unscheduled urgent and emergency healthcare delivery and improve A&E operations. A comprehensive literature review is undertaken to investigate the extent and efficacy of process management in healthcare delivery. It shows that process management methods such as Business Process Re-engineering and Lean tend to be applied to individual departments. End-to-end process orientated approaches are scarcely applied. Assessing access to urgent and emergency healthcare in England, a lack of process design and management is found which results in confusion for patients. Based on principles of process orientation, a new proposal is developed that features local urgent healthcare hubs. To investigate the current process, an analysis of A&E providers by catchment area was carried out for London to understand how features of an area such as number of general practitioners affects demand in A&E.
    [Show full text]