The Luxembourg Operational Research LuxOR unit coordinates field research projects and operational research training, and provides support for documentation activities and routine data collection.
The Intersectional Benchmarking Unit collects and analyses data about local labour markets in all locations where MSF employs people. This Guide explains the terms, concepts, and rules of humanitarian law in accessible and reader-friendly alphabetical entries.
The MSF Paediatric Days is an event for paediatric field staff, policy makers and academia to exchange ideas, align efforts, inspire and share frontline research to advance urgent paediatric issues of direct concern for the humanitarian field.
The MSF Foundation aims to create a fertile arena for logistics and medical knowledge-sharing to meet the needs of MSF and the humanitarian sector as a whole. We provide medical assistance to people affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or exclusion from healthcare.
Our teams are made up of tens of thousands of health professionals, logistic and administrative staff - most of them hired locally. Our actions are guided by medical ethics and the principles of impartiality, independence and neutrality. Haiti Shortages of fuel, water threaten medical care in Haiti. Press Release 10 Nov Identifying a top-notch health care system is fairly easy. While health care systems are complex, several factors can be used to determine which systems are the most effective.
The systems in play are incredibly complex, and there is significant debate about which factors are most important and what a perfect system looks like. But healthcare is vitally important, so health-focused organizations keep searching for that elusive best system. CEOWorld Magazine 's Health Care Index "is a statistical analysis of the overall quality of the health care system, including health care infrastructure; health care professionals doctors, nursing staff, and other health workers competencies; cost USD p.
Patients have a lot of choice among doctors and hospitals, and cost sharing is quite low. It's capped for low-income people, reduced for care of those with chronic illnesses, and nonexistent for services to children. There are no subsidies for private health insurance, but the government regulates premiums, which can be higher for people with pre-existing conditions. Private insurers charge premiums on an actuarial basis when they first enroll a customer, and subsequently raise premiums only as a function of age — not health status.
Most physicians work in a fee-for-service setting based on negotiated rates, and there are limits on what they can be paid annually. Aaron: Switzerland. It has superior outcomes. Craig: Switzerland. The Swiss system looks a lot like a better-functioning version of the Affordable Care Act. Austin: Germany. Germany has a low level of cost-based access barriers — tied with Britain for the lowest among our competitors.
Ashish: Switzerland. Switzerland outperformed Germany on a number of important quality measures, including fewer unnecessary hospitalizations and lower heart attack mortality rates.
Uwe: Germany. How does the cost-effectiveness of Britain's "socialized medicine" stack up against the competitive but heavily regulated private system of Switzerland? It has better quality, and perhaps access, but those come at a higher cost.
But it is not necessarily more of a market than Britain; it just hides the heavy hand of government a bit more. In reality, the insurance and provider market is heavily regulated. The U. It systematically incorporates cost effectiveness into coverage decisions. These are two countries with high-performing health systems, but Switzerland has better access and quality, albeit at somewhat higher costs. Uwe: Switzerland. Switzerland has better facilities and speed of access to care.
France has extensive coverage, with costs that are high relative to many other nations. Which do our experts prefer? France provides an amazing level of access and quality for the cost. But there are other ways to incentivize innovation in the private sector besides how we pay for and deliver care. But the system really does have the strongest incentives for innovation on medical technology — which provides an amazing amount of welfare for citizens around the globe.
Austin: France. France has a far more equitable system, with few delays and reasonably good outcomes. However, the U. It was close, but I picked the United States. France's system is impressively comprehensive and in some respects simpler.
Switzerland relies on a competitive yet much-regulated system of private insurers. Which has the edge and why? This is a tough call. Switzerland does a good job of combining conservative and progressive beliefs about health care systems into a workable model providing top-notch access and quality at a reasonable cost.
It doesn't hurt that it does so through private although heavily regulated insurance. Austin: Switzerland. The Swiss system is so close to the A. Ashish: Switzerland Both of these countries spend a lot on health care, outpacing the average among high-income countries, and both perform comparably on measures of access to care.
However, in general, the Swiss health care system delivers a higher quality of care across a range of measures and invests more in innovation that fuels new knowledge and, ultimately, better treatments that we all benefit from. It is cheaper, its financing is more equitable, and its system is simpler.
Germany would have tied Switzerland had we averaged our rankings of the nations instead of using head-to-head matchups in a bracket system Switzerland eliminated Germany in the first round. Not one vote was unanimous among the judges, and all the semifinal and final votes were Clearly, there is room for disagreement about the relative merits of health systems, and different experts would surely reach different conclusions.
Some judges took a global view, giving the edge to countries, like the United States, that promoted innovation that benefited the rest of the world.
In other cases, how health systems treated the poorest of society was paramount. But there are many ways to reach that goal, and there will always be trade-offs. Learning about them from other systems and debating them honestly would probably do us a lot of good.
We hope that readers will consider this to be merely the beginning of a discussion, not the end. We welcome your questions or comments.
In fact, we look forward to writing articles in which we answer those questions and ask other experts with different views to weigh in. Have you experienced a health system outside the United States?
0コメント