RESUMO
The expansion of privatisation in health care has been discussed extensively in most European countries and remains a hot topic nowadays. In China, privatisation results in considerable changes in its health care system, especially accelerating the ever-growing private medical institutions (PMIs). The rapid growth of PMIs raises the question of regulation for the Chinese government. Given the fact that few studies are available on the regulation of PMIs in China, I attempted to fill that gap by discussing the development of PMIs with a special focus on legal-regulatory strategies. After assessing current legal-regulatory strategies concerning PMIs, the paper identifies three major concerns regarding effective legal rules (i.e. weak coherence, inconsistency and legislative vacancy) and three difficult issues regarding government capacity (i.e. the negative effects of decentralised political structure, the low professionalism of bureaucrats and lack of reliability) that impede the well-functioning of regulatory agencies in China. As a plausible response, the paper recommends that the newly drafted basic health law should assign a separate chapter to regulate PMIs and also an independent regulatory body should be established to manage the issues of PMIs in China. Detailed recommendations are the practical implications of ICESCR General Comment No. 14.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/normas , Regulamentação Governamental , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Direitos Humanos/legislação & jurisprudência , Setor Privado/normas , Privatização , China , Direito à Saúde , Responsabilidade SocialRESUMO
A primary care choice reform launched in Sweden in 2010 led to a rapid growth of private providers. Critics feared that the reform would lead to an increased tendency among new, profit-driven, providers, to select patients with lower health risks. Even if open risk selection is prohibited, providers can select patients in more subtle ways, such as establishing their practices in areas with higher health status. This paper investigates to what extent strategies were employed by local governments to avoid risk selection and whether there were any differences between left- and right-wing governments in this regard. Three main strategies were used: risk adjustment of the financial reimbursements on the basis of health and/or socio-economic status of listed patients; design of patient listing systems; and regulatory requirements regarding the scope and content of the services that had to be offered by all providers. Additionally, left-wing local governments were more prone than right-wing governments to adopt risk adjustment strategies at the onset of the reform but these differences diminished over time. The findings of the paper contribute to our understanding of how social inequalities may be avoided in tax-based health care systems when market-like steering models such as patient choice are introduced.
Assuntos
Reforma dos Serviços de Saúde/economia , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/economia , Atenção Primária à Saúde/economia , Prática Privada/economia , Reforma dos Serviços de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Governo Local , Política , Atenção Primária à Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Prática Privada/legislação & jurisprudência , Risco Ajustado , Fatores Socioeconômicos , SuéciaAssuntos
Conflito de Interesses , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/ética , Convênios Hospital-Médico/ética , Nefrologistas/ética , Diálise Renal , Instituições de Assistência Ambulatorial/ética , Instituições de Assistência Ambulatorial/legislação & jurisprudência , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Convênios Hospital-Médico/legislação & jurisprudência , Humanos , Falência Renal Crônica/terapia , Autorreferência Médica/ética , Autorreferência Médica/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados UnidosAssuntos
Tabela de Remuneração de Serviços/economia , Tabela de Remuneração de Serviços/legislação & jurisprudência , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/economia , Instituição de Longa Permanência para Idosos/economia , Instituição de Longa Permanência para Idosos/legislação & jurisprudência , Casas de Saúde/economia , Casas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/economia , Alemanha , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , HumanosRESUMO
This article examines the effects of state regulation and civil class action litigation on corporate compliance with nurse staffing and quality standards, corporate strategies to manage staffing and quality, and corporate financial status of a large for-profit nursing home chain. A historical case study was used to examine multiple public data sources, focusing on facilities in California from 2003 to 2011 during and after regulatory actions and litigation. The results showed that the state issued numerous deficiencies for violations of the nurse staffing and quality standards with minimal impact on quality compliance with state law. A class action jury trial found that the chain violated the state's minimum staffing standard on one-third of the total days during a six-year period and awarded a $677 million verdict. A court settlement and supervised injunction resulted in compliance with minimum staffing and some improvement in quality measures, but quality levels remained below the average California facilities. The litigation also had some negative financial impact on Skilled Healthcare Group's California facilities and parent company. Civil litigation had more impact on the chain than the regulatory oversight.
Assuntos
Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Responsabilidade Legal , Casas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , California , Governo Federal , Regulamentação Governamental , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/organização & administração , Humanos , Setor Privado , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde/normas , Governo Estadual , Recursos HumanosRESUMO
Medicine is evolving every day in its operating procedures and the services offered to patients, emphasizing personalized medicine, safety and medical benefits. The individual patient is more than ever the hub of healthcare organization. Medical innovation is thus a public health priority. However it requires an accurate assessment of medical utility and risk-benefit ratios, and in-depth analysis of economic and organizational impacts. Ten years of experience in the Paris Biotech Santé company incubator has identified key actions for effective support of research projects and the success of innovative companies. Strong expertise is needed to prepare development plans, ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and obtain research funding. During its first decade, this incubator has created 87 innovative companies employing 1500 people, raised more than 90 million euros of funding, and reached a cumulative company value of 1200 million euros. Key factors of success have been identified, but an analysis of the causes of failure shows that operational adjustments are mandatory, particularly a strong commitment from medical experts, in order to promote access to new and useful products for patients while at the same time assessing their social impact.
Assuntos
Disciplinas das Ciências Biológicas/tendências , Biotecnologia/tendências , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/tendências , Invenções/tendências , Empresa de Pequeno Porte/tendências , Terapias em Estudo/tendências , Conta Bancária/legislação & jurisprudência , Conta Bancária/organização & administração , Disciplinas das Ciências Biológicas/economia , Disciplinas das Ciências Biológicas/organização & administração , Biotecnologia/economia , Biotecnologia/organização & administração , Comportamento Cooperativo , Setor de Assistência à Saúde , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/economia , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/organização & administração , Humanos , Invenções/economia , Paris , Medicina de Precisão , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto , Escolas para Profissionais de Saúde , Empresa de Pequeno Porte/economia , Empresa de Pequeno Porte/legislação & jurisprudência , Empresa de Pequeno Porte/organização & administração , Terapias em Estudo/economia , UniversidadesAssuntos
Instituições Privadas de Saúde , Política de Saúde , Legislação Médica , Comércio , Conflito de Interesses , Ética Médica , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/economia , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Política de Saúde/economia , Política de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Humanos , SuéciaRESUMO
The long-term care insurance act of 1994 introduced two branches of long-term care insurance (LTCI), namely the social LTCI and a mandatory private LTCI. Both branches together cover almost the whole population. Insurees of the social LTCI, however, have a higher age-specific dependency ratio. Furthermore, social LTCI covers a higher share of elderly people. Therefore, per capita expenses are twice as high as in private LTCI - even if benefits for civil servants directly financed out of the public purse are taken into consideration. Moreover, on average members of private LTCI have higher incomes. If organised according to the principles of social LTCI, private LTCI could therefore operate with a contribution rate that is only one third of the rate necessary in social LTCI. Being assigned to social LTC thus creates a considerable disadvantage for the insurees that cannot be justified. Fairness considerations therefore demand reform. The most simple, but politically most difficult, reform option is to abolish the dualism of social and private LTCI and create an integrated system for the whole population instead. If this is not possible at least a risk equalization scheme should be introduced that equalizes the risk structure concerning the expenses and - if possible - also the income side.
Assuntos
Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Seguro de Assistência de Longo Prazo/legislação & jurisprudência , Programas Nacionais de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Prestação Integrada de Cuidados de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Financiamento Governamental/legislação & jurisprudência , Alemanha , Reforma dos Serviços de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Humanos , Seguradoras/legislação & jurisprudência , Gestão de Riscos/legislação & jurisprudência , Fatores SocioeconômicosRESUMO
The debate over which health care providers are most capably meeting their responsibilities in serving the public's interest continues unabated, and the comparisons of not-for-profit (NFP) versus for-profit (FP) hospitals remain at the epicenter of the discussion. From the perspective of available factual information, which of the two sides to this debate is correct? This article is part I of a 2-part series on comparing and contrasting the performance records of NFP health care providers with their FP counterparts. Although it is demonstrated that both NFP and FP providers perform virtuous and selfless feats on behalf of America's public, it is also shown that both camps are involved in potentially willful clinical and administrative missteps. Part I contains the background information (eg, legal differences, perspectives on social responsibility, and types of questionable and fraudulent behavior) that is necessary to adequately understand the scope of the comparison issue. Part II offers actual comparisons of the 2 organizational structures using several disparate factors such as specific organizational behaviors, approach to the health care priorities of cost and quality, and business-focused goals of profits, efficiency, and community benefit.
Assuntos
Eficiência Organizacional , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/organização & administração , Organizações sem Fins Lucrativos/organização & administração , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/economia , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Organizações sem Fins Lucrativos/economia , Organizações sem Fins Lucrativos/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados UnidosAssuntos
Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Fraude/legislação & jurisprudência , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/organização & administração , Massachusetts , Propriedade , Encaminhamento e Consulta/economia , Encaminhamento e Consulta/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados UnidosAssuntos
Instituições Privadas de Saúde/organização & administração , Administradores de Instituições de Saúde , Alabama , Fraude/legislação & jurisprudência , Instituições Privadas de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Centros de Reabilitação/organização & administração , Sudeste dos Estados UnidosRESUMO
The objective of this study is to examine the litigation experience of twenty-eight nursing homes in Hillsborough County, Florida. Primary data were collected from Hillsborough County Circuit Court's Clerk's Recording Computer System about lawsuit activity from 1996 to 2000 and linked to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting system. We found that registered nurse levels, size, and being part of a chain or system impacted litigation in Hillsborough County.