DOCSLIB.ORG

International Profiles of Health Care Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
International Profiles of Health Care Systems DECEMBER 2020 AUSTRALIA BRAZIL CANADA CHINA DENMARK ENGLAND FRANCE GERMANY INDIA ISRAEL ITALY JAPAN NETHERLANDS NEW ZEALAND NORWAY SINGAPORE SWEDEN SWITZERLAND TAIWAN 2020 UNITED STATES International Profiles of Health Care Systems EDITED BY Roosa Tikkanen and Robin Osborn The Commonwealth Fund Elias Mossialos, Ana Djordjevic, and George Wharton London School of Economics and Political Science Contents The Australian Health Care System 7 The Brazilian Health Care System 17 The Canadian Health Care System 27 The Chinese Health Care System 37 The Danish Health Care System 47 The English Health Care System 59 The French Health Care System 71 The German Health Care System 83 The Indian Health Care System 93 The Israeli Health Care System 105 The Italian Health Care System 117 The Japanese Health Care System 127 The Dutch Health Care System 137 The New Zealand Health Care System 149 The Norwegian Health Care System 159 The Singaporean Health Care System 169 The Swedish Health Care System 181 The Swiss Health Care System 191 The Taiwanese Health Care System 201 The U S Health Care System 211 Table 1 Primary and Secondary Health Insurance Coverage and Financing 224 Table 2 User Fees and Safety Nets 226 Table 3 Health Care Delivery 227 Table 4 Medical Education 228 The Australian Health Care System Lucinda Glover, with contributions from Michael Woods London School of Economics Australia has a regionally administered, universal public health insurance program (Medicare) that is financed through general tax revenue and a government levy Enrollment is automatic for citizens, who receive free public hospital care and substantial coverage for physician services, pharmaceuticals, and certain other services New Zealand citizens, permanent residents, and people from countries with reciprocal benefits are eligible to enroll in Medicare Approximately half of Australians buy private supplementary insurance to pay for private hospital care, dental services, and other services The federal government pays a rebate toward this premium and also charges a tax penalty on higher-income households that do not purchase private insurance How does universal health coverage work? It took 10 years of political tension to establish Australia’s universal public health insurance program, known as Medicare A universal health care bill was initially introduced in Parliament in 1973 but failed three times to pass through the Senate Because of these failed attempts, a new parliamentary election was called, a procedure known as double dissolution, to resolve the deadlock The new Parliament passed the health care legislation in 1974, establishing free public hospital care and subsidized private care However, following a change in government in 1975, access to free health care services was limited to retired persons who met stringent means tests After another change of government in 1984, the current Medicare system was established Medicare provides free public hospital care and substantial coverage for physician services and pharmaceuticals for Australian citizens, residents with permanent visas, and New Zealand citizens following their enrollment in the program and confirmation of identity 1 Restricted access is provided to citizens of certain other countries through formal agreements 2 Other visitors to Australia, as well as undocumented immigrants, do not have access to Medicare and are treated as private-pay patients, including those needing emergency services Role of government: Three levels of government are collectively responsible for providing universal health care: The federal government provides funding and indirect support for inpatient and outpatient care through the Medicare Benefits Scheme (MBS) and for outpatient prescription medicine through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) The federal government is also responsible for regulating private health insurance, pharmaceuticals, and therapeutic goods; however, it has a limited role in direct service delivery States own and manage service delivery for public hospitals, ambulances, public dental care, community health (primary and preventive care), and mental health care They contribute their own funding in addition to that provided by federal government States are also responsible for regulating private hospitals, the location of pharmacies, and the health care workforce Local governments play a role in the delivery of community health and preventive health programs, such as immunizations and the regulation of food standards 3 At the federal level, intergovernmental collaboration and decision-making occur through the Council of Australian Governments (COAG), with representation from the prime minister and the first ministers of each state The COAG focuses on the highest-priority issues, such as major funding discussions and the interchange of roles and responsibilities among governments The COAG Health Council is responsible for more detailed policy issues and is supported by the Australian Health Minister’s Advisory Council The federal Department of Health oversees national policies and programs, including the MBS and PBS Payments through these schemes are administered by the Department of Human Services Other federal agencies involved in health care include the following: • The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee provides advice to the Minister for Health on the cost-effectiveness of new pharmaceuticals (but not routinely on delisting) International Profiles of Health Care Systems, 2020 7 AUSTRALIA • The Australian Digital Health Agency is responsible for matters relating to electronic health data, and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) also provide health data • The Therapeutic Goods Administration oversees supply, imports, exports, manufacturing, medical devices, pharmaceutical safety, and advertisement • The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency ensures registration and accreditation of the workforce in partnership with national boards • The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority regulates private health insurance, and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission promotes competition among private health insurers The state governments operate their own departments of health and have delegated the management of hospitals to Local Hospital Networks These hospital networks are responsible for working collaboratively with federally funded Primary Health Networks, which were established in 2015 to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and coordination of care Primary Health Networks have boards comprising medical professionals and community advisory committees ORGANIZATION OF THE HEALTH SYSTEM IN AUSTRALIA Australian Parliament State Parliaments Council of Australian Prime Minister & Cabinet Governments (COAG) State Premiers & Cabinets Federal Health Minister COAG Health Council State Health Ministers Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council State-run aged care Key regulatory bodies Community services Pharmacy Aged Care Quality and Agreement Public Safety Commission with community Pharmacy Australian Health health Guild of Practitioner Regulation services Australia Agency Public Australian Prudential Local hospitals Regulatory Authority (in Primary hospital (including Treasury portfolio with health networks oversight of private networks outpatients) health insurers) Australian Radiation Medical and Public dental Protection & Nuclear pharmaceutical services Safety Authority benefits to (including patients hospitals) Food Standards Australia New Zealand Therapeutic Goods Hierarchical (may include funding) Administration Negotiation Funding Source: L Glover, 2020 8 The Commonwealth Fund AUSTRALIA Role of public health insurance: Total health expenditures in 2015–2016 represented 10 3 percent of the GDP, an increase of 3 6 percent from 2014–2015 Two-thirds of these expenditures (67%) were funded by the government 4 Medicare is funded through the national tax system, in part by a government levy, which raised an estimated AUD 114 6 billion (USD 80 14 billion)5 in 2015–2016 6 Since 2014, a share of the money raised from this levy also supports the National Disability Insurance Scheme Role of private health insurance: Private health insurance is readily available and offers coverage for out-of-pocket fees and private providers, greater choice of providers (particularly in hospitals), faster access to nonemergency services, and rebates for selected services Private health insurance may include coverage for hospital care, general treatment, or ambulance services General treatment coverage provides insurance for dental, physiotherapy, chiropractic, podiatry, home nursing, and optometry services Coverage may be capped by dollar amount or by number of services For hospital services, patients can opt to be treated as a public patient (with full fee coverage) or as a private patient (with 75% fee coverage) Government policies encourage enrollment in private health insurance through a tax rebate (8 5%–33 9%, depending on age and income) and an income-based penalty payment (1%–1 5%) for not having private insurance This penalty, known as the Medicare Levy surcharge, applies only to singles with incomes above $90,000 and families with incomes above $180,000 7 The Lifetime Health Coverage program provides a lower health insurance premium for life However, there is a 2 percent increase in the base premium for each year after age 30 Consequently, sign-up is highest among those 30 and under, with a trend to opt out starting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Making Medicare: the Politics of Universal Health Care in Australia
    CSIRO PUBLISHING Australian Health Review, 2014, 38, 119–120 Book review http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AHv38n1_BR1 Book review MAKING MEDICARE:THE POLITICS OF UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE IN AUSTRALIA Anne-marie Boxall and James A. Gillespie New South Publishing, 2013. ISBN: 9781742233437, 223 pages. This is an excellent book. It should be required reading for proposed national contributory scheme, which would have anyone involved in health and health financing policy, most provided universal cover, was shelved. His later support for a particularly Commonwealth public servants advising the new voluntary private health insurance system was for him a second- Abbott Government. best approach. Key Labour Party figures were still firmly opposed The book is a fair and balanced account of the long history of to Medibank and its fee-for-service approach, even after the development and consolidation of Australia’s universal health dismissal of the Whitlam Government in 1975, whereas key insurance system. It includes careful analysis of both the policy Coalition ministers, including even Fraser, genuinely intended issues involved and the practical considerations of conflicting to maintain Medibank even if they were never passionate interests, implementation challenges, political factors and supporters. broader contextual environments. Although there may well be More important than the ‘ideas’ were the interests and a broad consensus now about the basic framework for Medicare, institutions. The medical profession won the battle in the much of this book’s analysis is as pertinent today as it was in 1940s for fee-for-service against not only the advocates of a the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s or 1990s when that framework salaried national health system along the lines of the British was being debated so heatedly.
    [Show full text]
  • The Removal of Whitlam
    MAKING A DEMOCRACY to run things, any member could turn up to its meetings to listen and speak. Of course all members cannot participate equally in an org- anisation, and organisations do need leaders. The hopes of these reformers could not be realised. But from these times survives the idea that any governing body should consult with the people affected by its decisions. Local councils and governments do this regularly—and not just because they think it right. If they don’t consult, they may find a demonstration with banners and TV cameras outside their doors. The opponents of democracy used to say that interests had to be represented in government, not mere numbers of people. Democrats opposed this view, but modern democracies have to some extent returned to it. When making decisions, governments consult all those who have an interest in the matter—the stake- holders, as they are called. The danger in this approach is that the general interest of the citizens might be ignored. The removal of Whitlam The Labor Party captured the mood of the 1960s in its election campaign of 1972, with its slogan ‘It’s Time’. The Liberals had been in power for 23 years, and Gough Whitlam said it was time for a change, time for a fresh beginning, time to do things differently. Whitlam’s government was in tune with the times because it was committed to protecting human rights, to setting up an ombuds- man and to running an open government where there would be freedom of information. But in one thing Whitlam was old- fashioned: he believed in the original Labor idea of democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada Health Act Canada Health Act
    CANADA HEALTH ACT CANADA HEALTH CANADA HEALTH ACT Public Administration Public Administration Accessibility Accessibility Universality Universality ANNUAL REPORT Comprehensiveness Comprehensiveness 2014–2015 Portability Portability ANNUAL 2014 REPORT 2015 Health Canada is the federal department responsible for helping the people of Canada maintain and improve their health. Health Canada is committed to improving the lives of all of Canada’s people and to making this country’s population among the healthiest in the world as measured by longevity, lifestyle and effective use of the public health care system. Published by authority of the Minister of Health. Canada Health Act – Annual Report 2014–2015 is available on Internet at the following address: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/pubs/cha-lcs/index-eng.php Également disponible en français sous le titre: Loi canadienne sur la santé – Rapport Annuel 2014-2015 This publication can be made available on request on diskette, large print, audio-cassette and braille. For further information or to obtain additional copies, please contact: Health Canada Address Locator 0900C2 Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9 Telephone: (613) 957-2991 Toll free: 1-866-225-0709 Fax: (613) 941-5366 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of Health of Canada, 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this information (publication or product) may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in a retrieval system, without prior written permission of the Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0S5 or [email protected] HC Pub: 150140 Cat.: H1-4E-PDF ISBN:1497-9144 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Health Canada would like to acknowledge the work and effort that went into producing this Annual Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Patient Care Through Telepharmacy September 2016
    Patient Care through Telepharmacy September 2016 Gregory Janes Objectives 1. Describe why telepharmacy started and how it has evolved with technology 2. Explain how telepharmacy is being used to provide better patient care, especially in rural areas 3. Understand the current regulatory environment around the US and what states are doing with regulation Agenda ● Origins of Telepharmacy ● Why now? ● Telepharmacy process ● Regulatory environment ● Future Applications Telepharmacy Prescription verification CounselingPrescription & verification Education History Origins of Telepharmacy 1942 Australia’s Royal Flying Doctor Service 2001 U.S. has first state pass telepharmacy regulation 2003 Canada begins first telepharmacy service 2010 Hong Kong sees first videoconferencing consulting services US Telepharmacy Timeline 2001 North Dakota first state to allow 2001 Community Health Association in Spokane, WA launches program 2002 NDSU study begins 2003 Alaska Native Medical Center program 2006 U.S. Navy begins telepharmacy 2012 New generation begins in Iowa Question #1 What was the first US state to allow Telepharmacy? a) Alaska b) North Dakota c) South Dakota d) Hawaii Question #1 What was the first US state to allow Telepharmacy? a) Alaska b) North Dakota c) South Dakota d) Hawaii NDSU Telepharmacy Study Study from 2002-2008 ● 81 pharmacies ○ 53 retail and 28 hospital ● Rate of dispensing errors <1% ○ Compared to national average of ~2% ● Positive outcomes, mechanisms could be improved Source: The North Dakota Experience: Achieving High-Performance
    [Show full text]
  • Preventive Health Care
    PREVENTIVE HEALTH CARE DANA BARTLETT, BSN, MSN, MA, CSPI Dana Bartlett is a professional nurse and author. His clinical experience includes 16 years of ICU and ER experience and over 20 years of as a poison control center information specialist. Dana has published numerous CE and journal articles, written NCLEX material, written textbook chapters, and done editing and reviewing for publishers such as Elsevire, Lippincott, and Thieme. He has written widely on the subject of toxicology and was recently named a contributing editor, toxicology section, for Critical Care Nurse journal. He is currently employed at the Connecticut Poison Control Center and is actively involved in lecturing and mentoring nurses, emergency medical residents and pharmacy students. ABSTRACT Screening is an effective method for detecting and preventing acute and chronic diseases. In the United States healthcare tends to be provided after someone has become unwell and medical attention is sought. Poor health habits play a large part in the pathogenesis and progression of many common, chronic diseases. Conversely, healthy habits are very effective at preventing many diseases. The common causes of chronic disease and prevention are discussed with a primary focus on the role of health professionals to provide preventive healthcare and to educate patients to recognize risk factors and to avoid a chronic disease. nursece4less.com nursece4less.com nursece4less.com nursece4less.com 1 Policy Statement This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the policies of NurseCe4Less.com and the continuing nursing education requirements of the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation for registered nurses. It is the policy of NurseCe4Less.com to ensure objectivity, transparency, and best practice in clinical education for all continuing nursing education (CNE) activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Young People in Residential Aged Care (20 7 – 20 8)
    YOUNG PEOPLE IN RESIDENTIAL AGED CARELIVING (20 LIKE7 – 20 8) AEVERYONE SNAPSHOT ELSE AUGUST 2019 Summer Foundation is a not-for-profit organisation, established in 2006, that aims to change human service policy and practice related to young people in nursing homes. Our mission is to create, lead and demonstrate long-term sustainable changes that stop young people from being forced to live in nursing homes because there is nowhere else for them. PREPARED BY: Summer Foundation, ABN 90 117 719 516 PO Box 208, Blackburn 3180, Vic Australia Telephone: +613 9894 7006 Fax: +613 8456 6325 [email protected] www.summerfoundation.org.au 2019 by the Summer Foundation Ltd. A copy of this report is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence (international) CITATION GUIDE Bishop, G. M., Zail, J., Bo’sher, L. & Winkler, D. (2019) Young People in Residential Aged Care (2017 – 2 018) A Snapshot Melbourne, Australia: Summer Foundation. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank Dr Mark Brown for providing helpful advice on how to use and interpret the aged care datasets. We would also like to thank Natalie Rinehart for mapping state data and providing critical feedback on the report. DISCLAIMERS The Summer Foundation has contributed information towards this report and believes it to be accurate and reliable. Neither the Summer Foundation nor any contributors make any warranty, expressed or implied, regarding any information, including warranties to accuracy, validity or completeness of information. This guide is for educational purposes and the Summer Foundation cannot be held responsible for any actions taken on the basis of information outlined in this guide.
    [Show full text]
  • A Culture Change in Aged Care: the Eden Alternativetm
    Scholarly PAPER A culture change in aged care: The Eden AlternativeTM AUTHOR Dr. Sonya Brownie PhD, GradDipSc Lecturer, Ageing, Aged Care & Aged Services, School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. [email protected] KEY words The Eden AlternativeTM, ageing, aged care, culture change ABSTRACT Objective The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the values that The Eden AlternativeTM represents. The benefits, challenges and potential risks, associated with implementing this model for culture change will also be discussed. Setting Currently, 36 residential aged care facilities in Australia and New Zealand have implemented The Eden AlternativeTM. Alzheimer’s Australia has recently adopted The Eden AlternativeTM in two Western Australia respite centres to advance care practices. Primary argument The Eden AlternativeTM is a model for culture change in aged care that aims to enrich the lives of all who live and work in residential aged care facilities. Children, animals and plants enliven the environment and create an atmosphere reminiscent of home. The Eden AlternativeTM promotes human growth in aged care environments and strives to empower and enable older people to fulfil their right to construct and pursue meaningful lives. Conclusions In the United States of America (USA), The Eden AlternativeTM is associated with numerous benefits, including reductions in the total number and type of medications used by residents, (i.e. a decline in mind and mood‑altering drugs); reduced infection rates among residents; improved levels of sociability among residents; reduced levels of boredom and feelings of helplessness among residents, and improved staff retention rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Physician Workforce Supply on Health Care Network Adequacy DATA BRIEF
    Impact of Physician Workforce Supply on Health Care Network Adequacy DATA BRIEF JULY 2016 KEY TAKEAWAYS Several U.S. states currently have primary care and specialty physician supply rates that fall well below the national average supply rate. For example, the supply of primary care physicians in Mississippi is 71 percent of the national average. The supply of psychiatrists in Indiana is 58 percent of the national average. There is a high degree of variability by state in the number of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-designated health professional shortage areas (HPSAs). Such shortages constrain the ability of health plans to establish high-value provider networks. Network adequacy standards should take into account differences in physician supply and distribution across geographic areas, such as differences in the number of providers in urban versus rural areas. Impact of Physician Workforce Supply on Health Care Network Adequacy Summary Health plans are required to meet network adequacy standards established by either the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or accreditation organizations such as the National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) and Utilization Review Accreditation Commission (URAC). Network adequacy standards are intended to ensure that health plan provider networks offer consumers access to sufficient numbers and types of providers. Low provider density can adversely affect a plan’s ability to meet state-level standardized cutoffs for the number and types of physicians in a plan's network. A lack of available primary care physicians or specialists in a geographic area also impacts a plan’s ability to establish high-value networks. Our analysis indicates that specialty physician group supply rates fall well below the national averages for one or more specialty physician groups in several states.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada Health Act a Barrier to Reform? Nadeem Esmail and Bacchus Barua
    2018 Is the Canada Health Act a Barrier to Reform? Nadeem Esmail and Bacchus Barua 2018 • Fraser Institute Is the Canada Health Act a Barrier to Reform? by Nadeem Esmail and Bacchus Barua Contents Executive Summary / i Introduction / 1 1 The Failures of Canadian Health Policy and the Case for Reform / 2 2 How Canadian Health Policy Differs from Other Systems / 5 3 What Is the Canada Health Act? / 16 4 To What Extent Is the Canada Health Act a Barrier to Reform? / 19 5 Options for Reform / 26 Conclusion / 30 References / 33 About the Authors / 39 Acknowledgments / 40 Publishing Information / 41 Purpose, Funding, and Independence / 42 Supporting the Fraser Institute / 42 About the Fraser Institute / 43 Editorial Advisory Board / 44 Esmail and Barua • Is the Canada Health Act a Barrier to Reform? • i Executive Summary Despite spending more on health care than the majority of developed countries with universal-access health-care systems, Canada performs poorly in inter- national comparisons of the performance of health systems. Canada’s health poli- cies also differ from those of other nations with universal-access health care—in particular, those that have the developed world’s best performing universal sys- tems—in a number of ways. These include policies affecting private involvement in the insurance and delivery of core medical services, patient cost-sharing, dual practice by physicians, and activity-based funding for hospitals. Evidence of how Canada’s health-care system underperforms coupled with concerns about its fis- cal sustainability in the future suggest the need for policy reform. Canadian health-care policy, including decisions about what services will be provided under a universal scheme, how those services will be funded and remunerated, who will be permitted to deliver services, and whether those ser- vices can be partially or fully funded privately is determined exclusively by prov- incial governments in Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Preparation of Residential Aged Care Services for Extreme Hot Weather in Victoria, Australia
    HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH CSIRO PUBLISHING Australian Health Review, 2013, 37, 442–448 Feature http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AH13001 Preparation of residential aged care services for extreme hot weather in Victoria, Australia Judith A. McInnes1,2 BSc(Hons), MPH Joseph E. Ibrahim1 PhD, FRACP 1Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 6, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, Vic. 3004, Australia. Email: [email protected] 2Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Abstract Objectives. The purpose of this study was to describe preparations for extreme hot weather at Victorian public sector residential aged care services for the 2010À11 summer, and to examine the role of the Residential Aged Care Services Heatwave Ready Resource in this process. Method. Qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews of senior staff of Victorian public sector residential aged care services. Interviews were conducted at monthly intervals from November 2010 to March 2011, and data were analysed thematically. Results. All interviewees described pre-summer preparations for hot weather undertaken at the health services they represented. Staff awareness and experience, and having a heatwave plan, were reported to have facilitated heat preparedness, whereas challenges to preparations mainly concerned air conditioning. The Residential Aged Care Services Heatwave Ready Resource was used to inform heatwave plans, for staff and family education, and as an audit tool. Conclusions. An extensive and well-considered approach to minimisation of harm from extreme heat by a sample of residential aged care services is described, and the Residential Aged Care Services Heatwave Ready Resource is reported to have supported the heatwave preparedness process.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening Career Resilience
    STRENGTHENING CAREER RESILIENCE ANNUAL REPORT 2019/2020 CONTENT 2 Foreword by Chairman and Chief Executive 5 Board Members and Committees 7 Senior Management 8 Organisation Charts 10 Key Achievements 21 Looking Ahead to 2020 22 Financial Statements 02 FOREWORD BY CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE FOREWORD BY CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE In 2019, Workforce Singapore (WSG) redoubled our efforts to walk the journey with both workers and companies in navigating through the economic challenges and uncertainties ahead. We pushed on with our outreach activities, to ensure that more Singaporeans could benefit from information about and access to the programmes and services under the Adapt and Grow initiative, through targeted events such as sectoral and thematic focused career fairs to help Mr Lim Ming Yan, connect them to relevant opportunities. Mr Tan Choon Shian, Chairman Chief Executive We extended our reach into the heartlands and increased our engagement efforts through Careers Connect On-the-Go (CCOTG) Pop-Ups, offering career advisory and job search tips to jobseekers in a light and nimble format. Our Adapt and Grow Town roadshows were also enhanced to provide a more engaging and interactive experience to an increased number of visitors. Leveraging technology, MyCareersFuture introduced machine learning to enhance the overall user experience and provided a smarter and easier job match relevant for jobseekers. To help ensure greater career mobility, our Professional Conversion Programmes enabled more PMETs to switch sectors or take on new job roles. More importantly, it helped companies retain more workers, by providing redeployment support. The Career Trial programme was also expanded to include part-time roles to provide more job opportunities for Singaporeans, such as those with family commitments.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Systems in Transition (HIT) : France
    Health Systems in Transition Vol. 17 No. 3 2015 France Health system review Karine Chevreul Karen Berg Brigham Isabelle Durand-Zaleski Cristina Hernández-Quevedo Cristina Hernández-Quevedo (Editor), Ellen Nolte and Ewout van Ginneken (Series editors) were responsible for this HiT Editorial Board 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 Elias Mossialos, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom Ellen Nolte, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Ewout van Ginneken, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Series coordinator Gabriele Pastorino, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Editorial team Jonathan Cylus, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies 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 Dimitra Panteli, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Wilm Quentin, 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 Anne
    [Show full text]