ABSTRACT
Background: As called for by the Sustainable Development Goals, governments, development partners and civil society are working on anti-corruption, transparency and accountability approaches to control corruption and advance Universal Health Coverage.Objectives: The objective of this review is to summarize concepts, frameworks, and approaches used to identify corruption risks and consequences of corruption on health systems and outcomes. We also inventory interventions to fight corruption and increase transparency and accountability.Methods: We performed a critical review based on a systematic search of literature in PubMed and Web of Science and reviewed background papers and presentations from two international technical meetings on the topic of anti-corruption and health. We identified concepts, frameworks and approaches and summarized updated evidence of types and causes corruption in the health sector.Results: Corruption, or the abuse of power for private gain, in health systems includes bribes and kickbacks, embezzlement, fraud, political influence/nepotism and informal payments, among other behaviors. Drivers of corruption include individual and systems level factors such as financial pressures, poorly managed conflicts of interest, and weak regulatory and enforcement systems. We identify six typologies and frameworks that model relationships influencing the scope and seriousness of corruption, and show how anti-corruption strategies such as transparency, accountability, and civic participation can affect corruption risk. Little research exists on the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures; however, interventions such as community monitoring and insurance fraud control programs show promise.Conclusions: Corruption undermines the capacity of health systems to contribute to better health, economic growth and development. Interventions and resources on prevention and control of corruption are essential components of health system strengthening for Universal Health Coverage.
Subject(s)
Fraud/ethics , Fraud/prevention & control , Global Health/ethics , Government Programs/ethics , Social Responsibility , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/organization & administration , Fraud/statistics & numerical data , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Government Programs/organization & administration , Government Programs/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Universal Health Insurance/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
Background: Pharmaceutical corruption is a serious challenge in global health. Digital technologies that can detect and prevent fraud and corruption are particularly important to address barriers to access to medicines, such as medicines availability and affordability, stockouts, shortages, diversion, and infiltration of substandard and falsified medicines.Objectives: To better understand how digital technologies are used to combat corruption, increase transparency, and detect fraud in pharmaceutical procurement systems to improve population health outcomes.Methods: We conducted a multidisciplinary review of the health/medicine, engineering, and computer science literature. Our search queries included keywords associated with medicines procurement and digital technology in combination with terms associated with transparency and anti-corruption initiatives. Our definition of 'digital technology' focused on Internet-based communications, including online portals and management systems, supply chain tools, and electronic databases.Results: We extracted 37 articles for in-depth review based on our inclusion criteria focused on the utilization of digital technology to improve medicines procurement. The vast majority of articles focused on electronic data transfer and/or e-procurement systems with fewer articles discussing emerging technologies such as machine learning and blockchain distributed ledger solutions. In the context of e-procurement, slow adoption, justifying cost-savings, and need for technical standards setting were identified as key challenges for current and future utilization.Conclusions: Though there is a significant promise for digital technologies, particularly e-procurement, overall adoption of solutions that can enhance transparency, accountability and concomitantly combat corruption, is still underdeveloped. Future efforts should focus on tying cost-saving measurements with anti-corruption indicators, prioritizing centralization of e-procurement systems, establishing regulatory harmonization with standards setting, and incorporating additional anti-corruption technologies into procurement processes for improving access to medicines and to reach the overall goal of Universal Health Coverage.
Subject(s)
Fraud/prevention & control , Global Health/ethics , Inventions , Pharmaceutical Preparations/economics , Pharmaceutical Preparations/supply & distribution , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/organization & administration , Humans , Interdisciplinary Studies , Social ResponsibilityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fair financial contribution in healthcare financing is one of the main goals and challengeable subjects in the evaluation of world health system functions. This study aimed to investigate the equity in healthcare financing in Shiraz, Iran in 2018. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross- sectional survey conducted on the Shiraz, Iran households. A sample of 740 households (2357 persons) was selected from 11 municipal districts using the multi-stage sampling method (stratified sampling method proportional to size, cluster sampling and systematic random sampling methods). The required data were collected using the Persian format of "World Health Survey" questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using Stata14.0 and Excel 2007. The Gini coefficient and concentration and Kakwani indices were calculated for health insurance premiums (basic and complementary), inpatient and outpatient services costs, out of pocket payments and, totally, health expenses. RESULTS: The Gini coefficient was obtained based on the studied population incomes equal to 0.297. Also, the results revealed that the concentration index and Kakwani index were, respectively, 0.171 and - 0.125 for basic health insurance premiums, 0.259 and - 0.038 for health insurance complementary premiums, 0.198 and - 0.099 for total health insurance premiums, 0.126 and - 0.170 for outpatient services costs, 0.236 and - 0.061 for inpatient services costs, 0.174 and - 0.123 for out of pocket payments (including the sum of costs related to the inpatient and outpatient services) and 0.185 and - 0.112 for the health expenses (including the sum of out of pocket payments and health insurance premiums). CONCLUSION: The results showed that the healthcare financing in Shiraz, Iran was regressive and there was vertical inequity and, accordingly, it is essential to making more efforts in order to implement universal insurance coverage, redistribute incomes in the health sector to support low-income people, strengthening the health insurance schemes, etc.
Subject(s)
Health Expenditures/ethics , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Financing/ethics , Insurance Coverage/ethics , Insurance, Health/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Insurance, Health/statistics & numerical data , Iran , MaleSubject(s)
Social Responsibility , Sustainable Development/legislation & jurisprudence , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Adolescent , Child , Female , Global Health , Goals , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Humans , Male , United Nations/organization & administration , Universal Health Insurance/standardsABSTRACT
Disparities in access to infertility care and insurance coverage of infertility treatment represent marked injustices in US health care. The World Health Organization defines infertility as a disease. Infertility has multiple associated billing codes in use, as determined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. However, the often-prohibitive costs associated with infertility treatment, coupled with the lack of universal insurance coverage mandates, contribute to health care inequity, particularly along racial and socioeconomic lines.
Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility/economics , Healthcare Disparities/economics , Infertility/economics , Infertility/therapy , Insurance Coverage/economics , Personal Autonomy , Universal Health Insurance/economics , Adult , Female , Health Policy , Health Services Accessibility/ethics , Healthcare Disparities/ethics , Humans , Insurance Coverage/ethics , Male , United States , Universal Health Insurance/ethicsABSTRACT
Solidarity is commonly invoked in the justification of public health care. This is understandable, as calls for and appeals to solidarity are effective in the mobilization of unison action and the willingness to incur sacrifices for others. However, the reference to solidarity as a moral notion requires caution, as there is no agreement on the meaning of solidarity. The article argues that the reference to solidarity as a normative notion is relevant to health-related moral claims, but that it does not provide a convincing foundation of claims to universal health care. References to universal solidarity obliterate an important distinction between those moral demands that are founded on principles like justice, recognition, or humanity, and those demands that stem from partisan relations in communities. While there is no 'separate essence' of solidarity that could be referred to in order to argue for the conceptual necessity of solidarity's partiality, some features may reasonably be stipulated as being essential to solidarity with a view to its systematic function within moral philosophy. The normative and motivational force of the ties invoked by solidarity is particularly relevant when basic moral demands are not met, and societies are in need of significant forms of communal relatedness.
Subject(s)
Personal Autonomy , Social Welfare/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Delivery of Health Care/ethics , Human Rights , Humans , International Cooperation , Moral Obligations , Social Justice/ethicsABSTRACT
This article provides a commentary to Ole Norheim' s editorial entitled "Ethical perspective: Five unacceptable trade-offs on the path to universal health coverage." It reinforces its message that an inclusive, participatory process is essential for ethical decision-making and underlines the crucial importance of good governance in setting fair priorities in healthcare. Solidarity on both national and international levels is needed to make progress towards the goal of universal health coverage (UHC).
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Ethical Theory , Global Health , Goals , Health Care Reform , Health Policy , Health Services Accessibility , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , MoralsABSTRACT
Priority setting is inevitable on the path towards universal health coverage. All countries experience a gap between their population's health needs and what is economically feasible for governments to provide. Can priority setting ever be fair and ethically acceptable? Fairness requires that unmet health needs be addressed, but in a fair order. Three criteria for priority setting are widely accepted among ethicists: cost-effectiveness, priority to the worse-off, and financial risk protection. Thus, a fair health system will expand coverage for cost-effective services and give extra priority to those benefiting the worse-off, whilst at the same time providing high financial risk protection. It is considered unacceptable to treat people differently according to their gender, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, social status, or place of residence. Inequalities in health outcomes associated with such personal characteristics are therefore unfair and should be minimized. This commentary also discusses a third group of contested criteria, including rare diseases, small health benefits, age, and personal responsibility for health, subsequently rejecting them. In conclusion, countries need to agree on criteria and establish transparent and fair priority setting processes.
Subject(s)
Health Priorities , Health Services Administration , Insurance, Health , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Health Services Administration/economics , Health Services Administration/ethics , Humans , Insurance, Health/economics , Insurance, Health/ethics , Male , Morals , Socioeconomic FactorsABSTRACT
This article discusses what ethicists have called "unacceptable trade-offs" in health policy choices related to universal health coverage (UHC). Since the fiscal space is constrained, trade-offs need to be made. But some trade-offs are unacceptable on the path to universal coverage. Unacceptable choices include, among other examples from low-income countries, to expand coverage for services with lower priority such as coronary bypass surgery before securing universal coverage for high-priority services such as skilled birth attendance and services for easily preventable or treatable fatal childhood diseases. Services of the latter kind include oral rehydration therapy for children with diarrhea and antibiotics for children with pneumonia. The article explains why such trade-offs are unfair and unacceptable even if political considerations may push in the opposite direction.
Subject(s)
Health Care Rationing , Health Equity , Health Policy , Health Priorities , Morals , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Child , Developing Countries , Humans , IncomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The drive toward universal health coverage (UHC) is central to the post 2015 agenda, and is incorporated as a target in the new Sustainable Development Goals. However, it is recognised that an equity dimension needs to be included when progress to this goal is monitored. WHO have developed a monitoring framework which proposes a target of 80% coverage for all populations regardless of income and place of residence by 2030, and this paper examines the feasibility of this target in relation to antenatal care and skilled care at delivery. METHODOLOGY: We analyse the coverage gap between the poorest and richest groups within the population for antenatal care and presence of a skilled attendant at birth for countries grouped by overall coverage of each maternal health service. Average annual rates of improvement needed for each grouping (disaggregated by wealth quintile and urban/rural residence) to reach the goal are also calculated, alongside rates of progress over the past decades for comparative purposes. FINDINGS: Marked inequities are seen in all groups except in countries where overall coverage is high. As the monitoring framework has an absolute target countries with currently very low coverage are required to make rapid and sustained progress, in particular for the poorest and those living in rural areas. The rate of past progress will need to be accelerated markedly in most countries if the target is to be achieved, although several countries have demonstrated the rate of progress required is feasible both for the population as a whole and for the poorest. CONCLUSIONS: For countries with currently low coverage the target of 80% essential coverage for all populations will be challenging. Lessons should be drawn from countries who have achieved rapid and equitable progress in the past.
Subject(s)
Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Needs and Demand/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities , Maternal Health/statistics & numerical data , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Universal Health Insurance/statistics & numerical data , Demography , Female , Global Health/economics , Health Services Needs and Demand/economics , Health Services Needs and Demand/ethics , Humans , Maternal Health/economics , Maternal Health/ethics , Poverty/ethics , Pregnancy , Surveys and Questionnaires , Universal Health Insurance/economics , Universal Health Insurance/ethicsSubject(s)
Bioethical Issues , Bioethics , Delivery of Health Care/ethics , Health Care Sector/ethics , Publishing/ethics , Aged , Books , Europe , Humans , Philosophy , United States , Universal Health Insurance/ethicsABSTRACT
Children suffer most from today's increasing precariousness. In France, access to care is available for all children through various structures and existing measures. The support for foreign children is overseen by specific legislation often unfamiliar to caregivers. Pediatric emergencies, their location, organization, actors, and patient flow are a particular environment that is not always suitable to communication and may lead to situations of abuse. Communication should not be forgotten because of the urgency of the situation. The place of the child in the dialogue is often forgotten. Considering the triangular relationship, listening to the child and involving the parents in care are the basis for a good therapeutic alliance. Privacy and medical confidentiality in pediatric emergencies are governed by law. However, changes in treatments and medical practices along with the variety of actors involved imply both individual and collective limitations, to the detriment of medical confidentiality.
Subject(s)
Communication , Confidentiality , Emergency Medical Services/ethics , Ethics, Medical , Health Services Accessibility/ethics , Child , Confidentiality/ethics , Confidentiality/legislation & jurisprudence , Emergency Medical Services/legislation & jurisprudence , France , Humans , Patient Admission/legislation & jurisprudence , Physician-Patient Relations/ethics , Professional-Family Relations/ethics , Refugees/legislation & jurisprudence , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/legislation & jurisprudenceSubject(s)
Healthcare Disparities , Universal Health Insurance , Developing Countries , Female , Health Expenditures , Health Policy , Humans , Male , Patient Rights , Socioeconomic Factors , Universal Health Insurance/economics , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Vulnerable Populations , World Health OrganizationABSTRACT
There has been an explosion of interest in the concept of 'universal health coverage', fuelled by publication of the World Health Report 2010. This paper argues that the system of user charges for health services is a fundamental determinant of levels of coverage. A charge can lead to a loss of utility in two ways. Citizens who are deterred from using services by the charge will suffer an adverse health impact. And citizens who use the service will suffer a loss of wealth. The role of social health insurance is threefold: to reduce households' financial risk associated with sickness; to promote enhanced access to needed health services; and to contribute to societal equity objectives, through an implicit financial transfer from rich to poor and healthy to sick. In principle, an optimal user charge policy can ensure that the social health insurance funds are used to best effect in pursuit of these objectives. This paper calls for a fundamental rethink of attitudes and policy towards user charges.
Subject(s)
Fees and Charges/ethics , Health Care Reform/economics , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Insurance Benefits/economics , Insurance, Health/economics , Universal Health Insurance/economics , Health Care Reform/ethics , Health Services Accessibility/ethics , Humans , Insurance Benefits/ethics , Insurance, Health/ethics , Universal Health Insurance/ethicsABSTRACT
The case for U.S. health system reform aimed at achieving wider insurance coverage in the population and disciplining the growth of costs is fundamentally a moral case, grounded in two principles: (1) a principle of social justice, the Just Sharing of the costs of illness, and (2) a related principle of fairness, the Prevention of Free-Riding. These principles generate an argument for universal access to basic care when applied to two existing facts: the phenomenon of "market failure" in health insurance and, in the U.S., the existing legal guarantee of access to emergency care. The principles are widely shared in U.S. moral culture by conservatives and liberals alike. Similarly, across the political spectrum, the fact of market failure is not contested (though it is sometimes ignored), and the guarantee of access to emergency care is rarely challenged. The conclusion generated by the principles is not only that insurance for a basic minimum of care should be mandatory but that the scope of that care should be lean, efficient, and constrained in its cost.
Subject(s)
Health Care Reform/ethics , Mandatory Programs/ethics , Moral Obligations , Social Justice , Universal Health Insurance/ethics , Cost Control/ethics , Economic Competition/ethics , Health Care Costs/ethics , Health Care Reform/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Accessibility/ethics , Humans , United StatesABSTRACT
The incidence of the reform is beginning to make itself felt and reveal a profound modification of the behaviour of health professionals in hospitals as well as of the financial structure of hospitals.