Policy Lessons From Early Reactions to the COVID-19 Virus in China.

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 virus outbreak to be a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020. Although the Chinese central government implemented significant measures to control the epidemic from January 20 within China, the crisis had already escalated dramatically.Between December 1, 2019, and January 20, 2020, a total of 51 days passed before the Chinese central government took full control. Several major factors combined to cause what had been in retrospect a clear break in the governmental information chain between December 1 and January 20. The management of this epidemic also illustrated key organizational limitations of the current Chinese health system, in particular provincial-level senior officials' lack of knowledge and awareness of potential public health risks and insufficient emergency medical material storage and logistics arrangements.We review the specific disease control actions that the Chinese central government took between January 20 and January 27, the major reasons why the governmental information chain had broken before January 20, and key structural health system limitations highlighted as the epidemic expanded.

Strategies for Delivering Value-Based Care: Do Care Management Practices Improve Hospital Performance?

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Value-based payment has the potential to rein in the volume incentive inherent in fee-for-service payment by holding providers accountable for the quality of patient care they deliver. Success under the new payment structure will depend on how effectively key organizational reforms are embraced by providers in the implementation of quality improvement processes for care delivery. This study examined the relationship between implementation of care management processes (CMPs, the specific tactics that enable the practice of value-based care) and hospital performance under value-based payment. Using the American Hospital Association's Survey of Care Systems and Payment and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Hospital Compare, we estimated the relationship between hospital implementation of CMPs and performance as it relates to spending, patient satisfaction, readmission reduction, value-based purchasing, and clinical care outcomes. We found that hospitals increased implementation of CMPs from 2013 to 2014, which has led to modest changes in performance. We concluded that care coordination is associated with greater improvements in hospital performance. However, the long-term effects of resulting changes in care delivery may differ from the short-term effects. Thus, study findings underscore the importance of continued evaluation of care management practice as a strategy for optimizing delivery of high-quality, efficient patient care.

Uncomfortable realities: the challenge of creating real change in Europe's consolidating hospital sector.

BACKGROUND: This article examines uncomfortable realities that the European hospital sector currently faces and the potential impact of wide-spread rationalization policies such as (hospital) payment reform and privatization. METHODS: Review of relevant international literature. RESULTS: Based on the evidence we present, rationalization policies such as (hospital) payment reform and privatization will probably fall short in delivering better quality of care and lower growth in health expenses. Reasons can be sought in a mix of evidence on the effectiveness of these rationalization policies. Nevertheless, pressures for different business models will gradually continue to increase and it seems safe to assume that more value-added process business and facilitated network models will eventually emerge. CONCLUSIONS: The overall argument of this article holds important implications for future research: how can policymakers generate adequate leverage to introduce such changes without destroying necessary hospital capacity and the ability to produce quality healthcare.

Challenges facing the United States of America in implementing universal coverage.

In 2010, immediately before the United States of America (USA) implemented key features of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), 18% of its residents younger than 65 years lacked health insurance. In the USA, gaps in health coverage and unhealthy lifestyles contribute to outcomes that often compare unfavourably with those observed in other high-income countries. By March 2014, the ACA had substantially changed health coverage in the USA but most of its main features--health insurance exchanges, Medicaid expansion, development of accountable care organizations and further oversight of insurance companies--remain works in progress. The ACA did not introduce the stringent spending controls found in many European health systems. It also explicitly prohibits the creation of institutes--for the assessment of the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceuticals, health services and technologies--comparable to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Haute Autorité de Santé in France or the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in Australia. The ACA was--and remains--weakened by a lack of cross-party political consensus. The ACA's performance and its resulting acceptability to the general public will be critical to the Act's future.

En 2010, juste avant que les États-Unis d'Amérique aient mis en œuvre les principales caractéristiques de la loi Affordable Care Act (ACA, loi sur les soins abordables), 18% des résidents des États-Unis d'Amérique âgés de moins de 65 ans de disposaient d'aucune assurance-maladie. Aux États-Unis d'Amérique, les insuffisances dans la couverture maladie et les modes de vie malsains contribuent aux résultats qui sont souvent comparés de manière défavorable avec les résultats observés dans les autres pays à revenu élevé. En mars 2014, l'ACA a considérablement modifié la couverture maladie aux États-Unis d'Amérique, mais il reste encore beaucoup à faire concernant la plupart de ses caractéristiques principales - échanges d'assurance-maladie, développement du Medicaid, création d'organisations de soins responsables et surveillance accrue des compagnies d'assurances. L'ACA n'a pas introduit les contrôles rigoureux des dépenses qui existent dans de nombreux systèmes de santé européens. Elle interdit également explicitement la création d'instituts ­ pour l'évaluation du rapport coût-efficacité des produits pharmaceutiques, des services et des technologies de santé ­ comparables au National Institute for Health and Care Excellence du Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord, à la Haute Autorité de Santé en France ou au Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee en Australie. L'ACA était ­ et reste ­ affaiblie par le manque de consensus entre les partis politiques. La performance de l'ACA et son acceptabilité par le grand public seront déterminantes pour l'avenir de la loi.

En 2010, inmediatamente antes de que los Estados Unidos aplicaran características clave de la Ley de Cuidado de la Salud Asequible (ACA, por sus siglas en inglés), el 18 % de los residentes de Estados Unidos menores de 65 años carecían de seguro de salud. En los E.E.U.U., las brechas en la cobertura de salud y los estilos de vida insanos contribuyen a unos resultados que a menudo son peores que los observados en otros países con ingresos altos. En marzo de 2014, la ACA modificó sustancialmente la cobertura de salud en los Estados Unidos, pero la mayoría de sus características principales, es decir, el intercambio de seguros médicos, la expansión de Medicaid, el desarrollo de organizaciones de atención médica responsable y la mayor supervisión de las compañías de seguros son aún tareas pendientes. La ACA no introdujo controles de gastos estrictos como los presentes en muchos sistemas de salud europeos. Además, prohíbe explícitamente la creación de institutos para la evaluación de la rentabilidad de productos farmacéuticos, servicios y tecnologías de la salud, similares al Instituto Nacional de Salud y Excelencia Clínica en el Reino Unido de Gran Bretaña e Irlanda del Norte, la Haute Autorité de Santé en Francia o el Comité Asesor de Beneficios Farmacéuticos en Australia. La aplicación de la ACA era (y sigue siendo) insuficiente por la falta de consenso político entre todos los partidos. El cumplimiento de la ACA y su aceptación consiguiente por la población general serán decisivos para el futuro de la ley.

From bureaucratic administration to effective intervention: Comparing early governmental responses to the COVID-19 virus across East Asian and western health systems.

The outbreak of COVID-19 in early 2020 created dangerous public health conditions which pressured governments and health systems to respond in a rapid and effective manner. However, this type of rapid response required many governments to bypass standing; bureaucratic structures of health sector administration and political governance to quickly take; essential measures against a rapidly evolving public health threat. Each government's particular; configuration of governmental and health system decision-making created specific structural and functional challenges to these necessary centrally developed and coordinated strategies. Most East Asian governments (except Japan) succeeded relatively quickly in centralizing essential disease control and treatment initiatives in a timely manner. In contrast, a number of European countries, especially those with predominantly tax-based financing and politically managed health delivery systems, had greater difficulty in escaping bureaucratic governance and management constraints. Drawing on data about these governments' early stage COVID-19 control experiences, this article suggests that structural changes will be necessary if low-performing governments are to better respond to a pandemic. This paper also summarizes other relatively successful strategies. By adopting such strategies, nations can help overcome structural bureaucratic and administrative obstacles in responding to further waves of COVID-19 or similar future pandemic events.

Can Asia provide models for tax-based European health systems? A comparative study of Singapore and Sweden.

Singapore's health system generates similar levels of health outcomes as does Sweden's but for only 4.4% rather than 11.0% of gross domestic product, with Singapore's resulting health sector savings being re-directed to help fund both long-term care and retirement pensions for its elderly citizens. This paper contrasts the framework of financial risk-sharing and the configuration and management of health service providers in these two high-income, small-population countries. Two main institutional distinctions emerge from this country case comparison: (1) Key differences exist in the practical configuration of solidarity for payment of health care services, reflecting differing cultural roots and social expectations, which in turn carry substantial implications for financing long-term care and pensions. (2) Differing arrangements exist in the organization of health service institutions, in particular balancing public as against private sector responsibilities for owning, operating and managing these two countries' respective hospitals. These different structural characteristics generate fundamental differences in health sector financial and delivery outcomes in one developed country in Far East Asia as compared with a well-respected tax-funded health system in Western Europe. In the post-COVID era, as Western European policymakers find themselves forced to adjust their publicly funded health systems to (further) reductions in economic growth rates and overall tax receipts, and as the cost of the information revolution continues to rise while efforts to fund better coordinated social and home care services for growing numbers of chronically ill elderly remain inadequate, this two-country case comparison highlights a series of health system design questions that could potentially provide alternative health sector financing and service delivery strategies.

An important new health policy voice.

In the 10 years since its founding, the Israel Journal of Health Policy Research has established itself as an important voice in Israeli and international health policy. The Journal's ability to combine national and international perspectives on key issues in health services delivery and health systems analysis has developed a valuable new arena for academic research about the increasingly complex post-COVID future of health care systems.

Structural effects of the information revolution on tax-funded European health systems and some potential policy responses.

The ongoing information revolution has re-configured the policymaking arena for tax-funded health systems in Europe. A combination of constrained public revenues with rapid technological and clinical change has created a particularly demanding set of operational challenges. Tax-funded health systems face three ongoing struggles: 1) finding badly needed new public revenues despite inadequate GDP growth 2) channeling additional funds into new high-quality provider capacity 3) re-configuring the stasis-tied organizational structure and operations of existing public providers. This commentary reviews key elements of this new information-revolution-driven context, followed by a consideration of seven specific policy challenges that it creates and/or worsens for tax-funded European systems going forward.

Establishing Appropriate Agency Relationships for Providers in China.

Physicians play multiple roles in a health system. They typically serve simultaneously as the agent for patients, for insurers, for their own medical practices, and for the hospital facilities where they practice. Theoretical and empirical results have demonstrated that financial relations among these different stakeholders can affect clinical outcomes as well as the efficiency and quality of care. What are the physicians' roles as the agents of Chinese patients? The marketization approach of China's economic reforms since 1978 has made hospitals and physicians profit-driven. Such profit-driven behavior and the financial tie between hospitals and physicians have in turn made physicians more the agents of hospitals rather than of their patients. While this commentary acknowledges physicians' ethics and their dedication to their patients, it argues that the current physician agency relation in China has created barriers to achieving some of the central goals of current provider-side health care reform efforts. In addition to eliminating existing perverse financial incentives for both hospitals and physicians, the need for which is already agreed upon by numerous scholars, we argue that the success of the ongoing Chinese public hospital reform and of overall health care reform also relies on establishing appropriate physician-hospital agency relations. This commentary proposes 2 essential steps to establish such physician-hospital agency relations: (1) minimize financial ties between senior physicians and tertiary-level public hospitals by establishing a separate reimbursement system for senior physicians, and (2) establishing a comprehensive physician professionalism system underwritten by the Chinese government, professional physician associations, and major health care facilities as well as by physician leadership representatives. Neither of these suggestions is addressed adequately in current health care reform activities.

The impact of slow economic growth on health sector reform: a cross-national perspective.

This paper assesses recent health sector reform strategies across Europe adopted since the onset of the 2008 financial crisis. It begins with a brief overview of the continued economic pressure on public funding for health care services, particularly in tax-funded Northern European health care systems. While economic growth rates across Europe have risen a bit in the last year, they remain below the level necessary to provide the needed expansion of public health sector revenues. This continued public revenue shortage has become the central challenge that policymakers in these health systems confront, and increasingly constrains their potential range of policy options. The paper then examines the types of targeted reforms that various European governments have introduced in response to this increased fiscal stringency. Particularly in tax-funded health systems, these efforts have been focused on two types of changes on the production side of their health systems: consolidating and/or centralizing administrative authority over public hospitals, and revamping secondary and primary health services as well as social services to reduce the volume, cost and less-than-optimal outcomes of existing public elderly care programs. While revamping elderly care services also was pursued in the social health insurance (SHI) system in the Netherlands, both the Dutch and the German health systems also made important changes on the financing side of their health systems. Both types of targeted reforms are illustrated through short country case studies. Each of these country assessments flags up new mechanisms that have been introduced and which potentially could be reshaped and applied in other national health sector contexts. Reflecting the tax-funded structure of the Canadian health system, the preponderance of cases discussed focus on tax-funded countries (Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, England, Ireland), with additional brief assessments of recent changes in the SHI-funded health systems in the Netherlands and Germany. The paper concludes that post-2008 European reforms have helped stretch existing public funds more effectively, but seem unlikely to resolve the core problem of inadequate overall public funding, particularly in tax-based health systems. This observation suggests that ongoing Canadian efforts to consolidate and better integrate its health care providers, while important, may not eliminate long-term health sector-funding dilemmas.

Re-thinking barriers to organizational change in public hospitals.

Public hospitals are well known to be difficult to reform. This paper provides a comprehensive six-part analytic framework that can help policymakers and managers better shape their organizational and institutional behavior. The paper first describes three separate structural characteristics which, together, inhibit effective problem description and policy design for public hospitals. These three structural constraints are i) the dysfunctional characteristics found in most organizations, ii) the particular dysfunctions of professional health sector organizations, and iii) the additional dysfunctional dimensions of politically managed organizations. While the problems in each of these three dimensions of public hospital organization are well-known, and the first two dimensions clearly affect private as well as publicly run hospitals, insufficient attention has been paid to the combined impact of all three factors in making public hospitals particularly difficult to manage and steer. Further, these three structural dimensions interact in an institutional environment defined by three restrictive context limitations, again two of which also affect private hospitals but all three of which compound the management dilemmas in public hospitals. The first contextual limitation is the inherent complexity of delivering high quality, safe, and affordable modern inpatient care in a hospital setting. The second contextual limitation is a set of specific market failures in public hospitals, which limit the scope of the standard financial incentives and reform measures. The third and last contextual limitation is the unique problem of generalized and localized anxiety, which accompanies the delivery of medical services, and which suffuses decision-making on the part of patients, medical staff, hospital management, and political actors alike. This combination of six institutional characteristics - three structural dimensions and three contextual dimensions - can help explain why public hospitals are different in character from other parts of the public sector, and the scale of the challenge they present to political decision-makers.

The impact of aging on long-term care in Europe and some potential policy responses.

The article examines recent data on the impact of increasing numbers of elderly people in Europe on expenditures for long-term care services. After reviewing recent and projected future costs of long-term care, the authors examine current national strategies for long-term care as well as potential policy options that could reduce future expenditures due to aging. Although long-term care expenditures in Europe will rise over the next several decades, countries can adopt a variety of strategies--many of them in social sectors outside the health system--to reduce or mitigate the overall effects of likely long-term care needs.

Health reform in Finland: current proposals and unresolved challenges.

The Finnish health care system is widely respected for its pilot role in creating primary-care-led health systems. In the early 1990s, however, a severe economic downturn in Finland reduced public funding and weakened the Finnish system's deeply decentralized model of health care administration. Recent Bank of Finland projections forecasting several decades of slow economic growth, combined with the impact of an aging population, appear to make major reform of the existing public system inevitable. Over the last several years, political attention has focused mostly on administrative consolidation inside the public sector, particularly integration of health and social services. Current proposals call for a reformed health sector governance structure based on a new meso-level configuration of public administration. In addition, Finland's national government has proposed replacing the current multi-channel public funding structure (which includes health insurance subsidies for occupational health services) with a single-channel public funding structure. This commentary examines several key issues involved in reforming the delivery structure of the Finnish health care system. It also explores possible alternative strategies to reform current funding arrangements. The article concludes with a brief discussion of implications from this Finnish experience for the wider health reform debate.

Structural patterns in Swedish health policy: a 30-year perspective.

This perspective reviews key institutional and organizational patterns in Swedish health care over the last 30 years, probing the roots of several complicated policy questions that concern present-day Swedish decision-makers. It explores in particular the ongoing structural tension between stability, on the one hand, and the necessary levels of innovation and dynamism demanded by the current period of major clinical, technological, economic, social and supranational (EU) change. Where useful, the article compares Swedish developments with those in the other three European Nordic countries as well as other northern European health systems. Sweden's health sector evolution can provide valuable insight for other countries into the complexity involved in re-thinking tradeoffs between policies that emphasize stability as against those that encourage innovation in health sector governance and provision.

Health sector solidarity: a core European value but with broadly varying content.

Although the concept of solidarity sits at the center of many European health sector debates, the specific groups eligible for coverage, the financing arrangements, and the range of services and benefits that, together, compose the operational content of solidarity have all changed considerably over time. In prior economic periods, solidarity covered considerably fewer services or groups of the population than it does today. As economic and political circumstances changed, the content of solidarity changed with them. Recent examples of these shifts are illustrated through a discussion of health reforms in Netherlands, Germany and also Israel (although not in Europe, the Israeli health system is similar in structure to European social health insurance systems). This article suggests that changed economic circumstances in Europe since the onset of the 2008 financial crisis may lead to re-configuring the scope and content of services covered by solidarity in many European health systems. A key issue for policymakers will be protecting vulnerable populations as this re-design occurs.

Governance, Government, and the Search for New Provider Models.

A central problem in designing effective models of provider governance in health systems has been to ensure an appropriate balance between the concerns of public sector and/or government decision-makers, on the one hand, and of non-governmental health services actors in civil society and private life, on the other. In tax-funded European health systems up to the 1980s, the state and other public sector decision-makers played a dominant role over health service provision, typically operating hospitals through national or regional governments on a command-and-control basis. In a number of countries, however, this state role has started to change, with governments first stepping out of direct service provision and now de facto pushed to focus more on steering provider organizations rather than on direct public management. In this new approach to provider governance, the state has pulled back into a regulatory role that introduces market-like incentives and management structures, which then apply to both public and private sector providers alike. This article examines some of the main operational complexities in implementing this new governance reality/strategy, specifically from a service provision (as opposed to mostly a financing or even regulatory) perspective. After briefly reviewing some of the key theoretical dilemmas, the paper presents two case studies where this new approach was put into practice: primary care in Sweden and hospitals in Spain. The article concludes that good governance today needs to reflect practical operational realities if it is to have the desired effect on health sector reform outcome.

Regulating incentives: the past and present role of the state in health care systems.

The desire of national policymakers to encourage entrepreneurial behavior in the health sector has generated not only a new structure of market-oriented incentives, but also a new regulatory role for the State. To ensure that entrepreneurial behavior will be directed toward achieving planned market objectives, the State must shift modalities from staid bureaucratic models of command-and-control to more sensitive and sophisticated systems of oversight and supervision. Available evidence suggests that this structural transformation is currently occurring in several Northern European countries. Successful implementation of that shift will require a new, intensive, and expensive strategy for human resources development, raising questions about the financial feasibility of this incentives-plus-regulation model for less-well-off CEE/CIS and developing countries.

United States of America: health system review.

This analysis of the United States health system reviews the developments in organization and governance, health financing, health-care provision, health reforms and health system performance. The US health system has both considerable strengths and notable weaknesses. It has a large and well-trained health workforce, a wide range of high-quality medical specialists as well as secondary and tertiary institutions, a robust health sector research program and, for selected services, among the best medical outcomes in the world. But it also suffers from incomplete coverage of its citizenry, health expenditure levels per person far exceeding all other countries, poor measures on many objective and subjective measures of quality and outcomes, an unequal distribution of resources and outcomes across the country and among different population groups, and lagging efforts to introduce health information technology. It is difficult to determine the extent to which deficiencies are health-system related, though it seems that at least some of the problems are a result of poor access to care. Because of the adoption of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, the United States is facing a period of enormous potential change. Improving coverage is a central aim, envisaged through subsidies for the uninsured to purchase private insurance, expanded eligibility for Medicaid (in some states) and greater protection for insured persons. Furthermore, primary care and public health receive increased funding, and quality and expenditures are addressed through a range of measures. Whether the ACA will indeed be effective in addressing the challenges identified above can only be determined over time.

Viewing second opinions in terms of recent developments in patient choice.

Patient choice has become an increasingly visible part of publicly funded health care systems. Since the 1990s, many individuals have gained the ability to select their insurer in social health insurance funded systems, while in tax-funded health systems many patients can now select their primary care and hospital providers. Second opinions about clinical procedures are part of this broad movement toward increased patient involvement in care-related decision-making. One interesting policy question will be whether the coming period of financial austerity will strengthen or weaken the role of choice as health systems seek to deal with the inevitable mismatch of demand for and supply of medical resources.