Is the Colombian health system reform improving the performance of public hospitals in Bogotá?

Many countries are experimenting with public hospital reform - both increasing the managerial autonomy with which hospitals conduct their affairs, and separating 'purchaser' and 'provider' sides of the health system, thus increasing the degree of market pressure brought to bear on hospitals. Evidence suggesting that such reform will improve hospital performance is weak. From a theoretical perspective, it is not clear why public hospitals should be expected to behave like firms and seek to maximize profits as this model requires. Empirically, there is very slight evidence that such reforms may improve efficiency, and reason to be concerned about their equity implications. In Colombia, an ambitious reform programme includes among its measures the attempt to universalize a segmented health system, the creation of a purchaser-provider split and the transformation of public hospitals into 'autonomous state entities'. By design, the Colombian reform programme avoids the forces that produce equity losses in other developing countries. This paper reports the results of a study that has tried to track hospital performance in other dimensions in the post-reform period in Bogotá. Trends in hospital inputs, production and productivity, quality and patient satisfaction are presented, and qualitative data based on interviews with hospital workers are analyzed. The evidence we have been able to collect is capable of providing only a partial response to the study question. There is some evidence of increased activity and productivity and sustained quality despite declining staffing levels. Qualitative data suggest that hospital workers have noticed considerable changes, which include greater responsiveness to patients but also a heavier administrative burden. It is difficult to attribute specific causality to all of the changes measured and this reflects the inherent difficulty of judging the effects of large-scale reform programmes as well as weaknesses and gaps in the data available.     

Does the use of the proportional shortfall help align the prioritisation of health services with public preferences?

It has been proposed that equity may be included in the economic evaluation of health services using the ‘proportional shortfall’ (PS)—the proportion of a person’s QALY expectation that they would lose because of an illness. The present paper reports the results of a population survey designed to test whether PS helped to explain people’s preferences for health services and whether it did this better than the absolute shortfall or the equity related variables that PS seeks to replace. Survey respondents were asked to allocate 100 votes between 13 scenarios and a standard scenario. Variation in the allocation of votes was explained by health gain and different combinations of the equity variables. Differences in votes for the comparisons were significantly related to differences in PS but the relationship was weaker than between votes and the age related variables. Cases were identified where PS suggested a priority ordering of services which was strongly rejected by respondents. It is concluded that the use of PS is unlikely to improve the alignment of priorities with public preferences.     

Do health reform polls clarify or confuse the public?

No wonder Americans are confused about which health reform proposal would best solve the country's needs. Many opinion polls conducted this year by the major news networks have focused on the public's approval of specific elements in the Clinton health plan, while ignoring its perception of the problem and alternative solutions. For polls to offer useful information to policymakers, pollsters must determine what the public wants, what it knows, and what paths it favors to reach those goals.     

Who does the work of public health?

Frequently, we take the "public" out of public health and allow the practice to become extremely narrow, limited to experts telling the public what's best for them.     

Do NHS clinicians and members of the public share the same views about reducing inequalities in health?

Decisions about how to allocate resources in health care are as much about social value judgements as they are about getting the medical facts right. In this context, it is important to compare the social preferences of members of the general public with those of National Health Service (NHS) staff involved in service delivery. A questionnaire eliciting peoples' preferences over maximising life expectancy and reducing inequalities in life expectancy between the highest and lowest social classes was completed by 271 members of the UK public and 220 NHS clinicians. The two samples have different preferences with the general public showing a greater willingness than clinicians to sacrifice total health for a more equal distribution of health. These differences may highlight tensions between what the public wants and what clinicians want, and should be subject to further investigation.     

Can public health and medicine partner in the public interest?

The dominant issues for health and health care today can be effectively engaged only if public health and medicine work together as better partners. Yet historical, professional, organizational, operational, and financial barriers exist to closer relationships. Fostering the necessary collaboration will require changes for both public health and medicine in leadership styles, professional education, practice incentives, accountability measures, and financing structures.     

Does federal health care policy influence switching between the public and private sectors in individuals?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if changes in Australian Federal health policy have influenced individual behaviour regarding utilisation of private health insurance in Western Australia. METHOD: The WA Data Linkage System was used to extract all hospital morbidity records in Western Australia from 1980 to 2001. For each individual, episodes were grouped into hospital couplets classified according to the mix of public and privately insured events. Logistic regression was used to estimate the likelihood of switching towards or away from the private sector, according to the time between episodes in each of five health care policy eras. RESULTS: The odds of a switch away from the private sector increased by 29% with each additional year between episodes, while the odds of a switch towards the private sector increased by 15% per intra-couplet year. In those with a private first episode the odds of switching decreased approximately exponentially across the five eras whereas the odds of switching in those with a public first episode stabilised after 1985. In the last era (1999-2001) the odds of switching away from the private sector reduced substantially. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that the recent policies supporting PHI (30% rebate and Lifetime Health Cover) appear to have been effective at modifying individual behaviour to reduce the drift away from the private sector. However, the reported increases in utilisation of PHI were only partially explained by switching of existing demand in patients who had been previously hospitalised as public patients, suggesting that the policy reforms had generated, rather than merely shifted, demand for health care. This finding has significant policy implications for Australia.     

More physicians in public health: less public health work?

AIM: The object was to assess changes in work priorities in local public health medicine in Norway over the period from 1994 to 1999. METHODS: Two cross-sectional studies were undertaken of physicians working in local public health medicine in all Norwegian municipalities, using a postal questionnaire. RESULTS: Half of the physicians working in public health in 1999 were recruited after 1994. Although the number of physicians working in public health increased from 505 in 1994 to 555 in 1999 (10%) an estimation of the total weekly hours worked decreased by 3.7% from 8,715 hours in 1994 to 8,386 hours in 1999. The vast majority of physicians worked in combined posts (87%), and they reduced their engagement in public health by 2.6 hours on average from 1994 to 1999. The reduction depended on remuneration model, speciality in community medicine, and municipality size. CONCLUSIONS: Local public health in Norway was under pressure in the 1990s. For public health physicians, preventive medicine lost out to clinical work. No promising signals of change in the professional or political framework or in incentives for public health work are seen.     

Do individuals respond to cost-sharing subsidies in their selections of marketplace health insurance plans?

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides assistance to low-income consumers through both premium subsidies and cost-sharing reductions (CSRs). Low-income consumers’ lack of health insurance literacy or information regarding CSRs may lead them to not take-up CSR benefits for which they are eligible. We use administrative data from 2014 to 2016 on roughly 22 million health insurance plan choices of low-income individuals enrolled in ACA Marketplace coverage to assess whether they behave in a manner consistent with being aware of the availability of CSRs. We take advantage of discontinuous changes in the schedule of CSR benefits to show that consumers are highly sensitive to the value of CSRs when selecting insurance plans and that a very low percentage select dominated plans. These findings suggest that CSR subsidies are salient to consumers and that the program is well designed to account for any lack of health insurance literacy among the low-income population it serves.     

Why feminism in public health?

The issues raised in this editorial and exemplified within a number of the studies reported in this issue indicate new directions for public health, directions which take feminist scholarship, both outside and within the medical framework, into account. The changing potential of feminist public health, as derived from the articles in this issue, can be summarised within the following issues: new research areas, positioning women as actors, development of theoretical frameworks, reflexive theory of science, interplay between sex and gender, gender-sensitive methods, diversities among women/men, pro-feminist research on men's health and using the results for change. Thus, feminist public health represents a shift towards the new public health, with holistic and multidisciplinary activities, based on theoretical pluralism, multiple perspectives and collective actions with the aim of improving the health of gender-subordinated groups.     

Do immigrants improve the health of natives?

This paper studies the effects of immigration on health. Specifically, we merge information on individual characteristics from the German Socio-Economic Panel (1984–2009) with detailed local labour market characteristics, and we then exploit the longitudinal component of the data to determine how immigration affects the health of both immigrants and natives over time. We find that immigrants to Germany are healthier than natives upon their arrival (the healthy immigrant effect) but that immigrants’ health deteriorates over time. We show that the convergence in health is heterogeneous across immigrants and occurs more rapidly among those working in more physically demanding jobs. Because immigrants are significantly more likely to work in strenuous occupations, we investigate whether changes in the spatial concentration of immigrants affect the health of the native population. Our results suggest that immigration reduces the likelihood that residents will report negative health outcomes. We show that these effects are concentrated in blue-collar occupations and are stronger among low-educated natives. Improvements in natives’ average working conditions and workloads help explain the positive effects of immigration on the health of the native population.     

Differences between public and private hospital care in Spain: the realities of health care or a numerical fallacy?

OBJECTIVE: To give an example of the misleading interpretations of the concepts "public and private" when dealing with simple data from hospital resources and activities in Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data comes from the survey of hospitals (EESCRI) for the year 2002 in Catalonia. Using the figures corresponding to resources (number of centers and beds) and activities (discharges, stays, mean stay, occupancy, and rotation) comparisons are made among different variables (managing authority and funding source) reclassified, according to the concepts of public and private. RESULTS: The figures on resources and activities offer a very different portrait about the public or private nature of the care provided, according to the variables being used for classification. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to specify the concepts and variables to be used when analyzing the performance of health services and to improve the information sources in order to adapt them to the new management forms of the health services.     

Do public health clinics reduce rehospitalizations?: the urban diabetes study

Safety-net health clinics have been shown to reduce hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. Their impact on rehospitalization after hospital discharge is unknown. We hypothesized that use of publicly-funded safety-net health clinics would reduce rates of rehospitalization among patients with diabetes. We expected this effect to be most evident among the most vulnerable patients. Linking data from the Philadelphia Health Care Centers (HCCs) with statewide hospital discharge data for 1994-2001 for patients with diabetes, we found that patients enrolled in the HCCs prior to hospitalization were rehospitalized 22% of the time, the same rate as other Philadelphians. Among those at higher risk of rehospitalization because pre-existing diabetes was not noted in hospital records, odds of rehospitalization were reduced by 24% for HCC patients. Given that patients in the HCCs are overwhelmingly poor and uninsured or underinsured, these findings suggest that access to primary care through the HCCs may have a protective effect against the poor health outcomes typically associated with lower socioeconomic status. Enrollment in publicly-funded safety-net health clinics may have prevented rehospitalizations for some vulnerable patients with diabetes.