2.1 Comparative Healthcare Systems

Healthcare systems around the world vary in their structure and financing. From government-run models to private insurance systems, each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses. Understanding these models helps us grasp how different countries tackle the challenge of providing healthcare to their citizens.

The design of a healthcare system impacts access, quality, and cost of care. Universal coverage models ensure broader access, while market-driven systems may offer more choice but at higher individual costs. Funding mechanisms range from taxation to employer contributions to out-of-pocket payments, each with its own implications for healthcare delivery and outcomes.

Healthcare System Models and Characteristics

Features of global healthcare systems

Top images from around the web for Features of global healthcare systems

• 

  Frontiers | Role of Wireless Communication in Healthcare System to Cater Disaster Situations ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | COVID-19 Pandemic as an Excellent Opportunity for Global Health Diplomacy View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Effect of specificity of health expenditure questions in the measurement of out-of-pocket health ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Role of Wireless Communication in Healthcare System to Cater Disaster Situations ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | COVID-19 Pandemic as an Excellent Opportunity for Global Health Diplomacy View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Features of global healthcare systems

• 

  Frontiers | Role of Wireless Communication in Healthcare System to Cater Disaster Situations ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | COVID-19 Pandemic as an Excellent Opportunity for Global Health Diplomacy View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Effect of specificity of health expenditure questions in the measurement of out-of-pocket health ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | Role of Wireless Communication in Healthcare System to Cater Disaster Situations ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Frontiers | COVID-19 Pandemic as an Excellent Opportunity for Global Health Diplomacy View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Beveridge Model (UK, Spain, New Zealand)
  • Government owns and operates healthcare facilities provides comprehensive services
  • Finances system through general taxation revenue collected by the government
  • Ensures universal coverage for all citizens regardless of income or employment status
• Bismarck Model (Germany, France, Japan)
  • Utilizes a mix of public and private insurance funds to cover healthcare costs
  • Requires contributions from both employers and employees to finance the system
  • Guarantees universal coverage for all citizens through mandatory participation
• National Health Insurance Model (Canada, Taiwan, South Korea)
  • Establishes a government-run insurance program that covers all citizens
  • Funds the system through general taxation revenue collected by the government
  • Allows private healthcare providers to deliver services within the public insurance framework
  • Offers universal coverage for all citizens regardless of income or employment status
• Out-of-Pocket Model (India, China, parts of Africa)
  • Involves limited government involvement in the provision or financing of healthcare
  • Relies on individual payments for services at the point of care
  • Results in limited access to healthcare for low-income populations unable to afford care

Pros and cons of system models

• Beveridge Model
  • Advantages
    • Promotes equitable access to healthcare services for all citizens
    • Reduces administrative costs by eliminating the need for multiple insurance providers
    • Enables strong government control over healthcare spending and resource allocation
  • Disadvantages
    • May lead to long wait times for non-urgent procedures due to limited resources
    • Restricts patient choice of providers within the government-owned system
    • Diminishes incentives for innovation and efficiency in healthcare delivery
• Bismarck Model
  • Advantages
    • Achieves universal coverage while maintaining a mix of public and private providers
    • Delivers high-quality healthcare services through competition among providers
    • Offers greater patient choice compared to the Beveridge Model
  • Disadvantages
    • Incurs higher administrative costs due to the involvement of multiple insurance funds
    • Risks overutilization of services as patients face limited out-of-pocket costs
    • Creates complexity in coordinating and regulating multiple insurance funds
• National Health Insurance Model
  • Advantages
    • Ensures universal coverage while allowing private healthcare providers to operate
    • Incurs lower administrative costs compared to the Bismarck Model
    • Provides greater patient choice compared to the Beveridge Model
  • Disadvantages
    • May result in long wait times for non-urgent procedures due to budget constraints
    • Limits government control over healthcare spending compared to the Beveridge Model
    • Reduces incentives for innovation and efficiency in healthcare delivery
• Out-of-Pocket Model
  • Advantages
    • Allows greater patient choice of providers in a market-driven system
    • Minimizes government spending on healthcare by shifting costs to individuals
    • Creates incentives for cost-conscious decision-making by patients
  • Disadvantages
    • Leads to inequitable access to healthcare based on individual ability to pay
    • Places a high financial burden on individuals, particularly those with chronic conditions
    • Encourages delayed care due to inability to pay, potentially worsening health outcomes

Healthcare System Performance and Financing

Impact of system design

• Access
  • Universal coverage models (Beveridge, Bismarck, NHI) ensure greater access to healthcare services for all citizens
  • Out-of-Pocket Model limits access for low-income populations unable to afford care
• Quality
  • Bismarck and NHI models tend to have high-quality healthcare services due to competition among providers
  • Beveridge Model may have lower quality due to limited resources and longer wait times
  • Out-of-Pocket Model quality varies based on individual ability to pay for services
• Cost
  • Beveridge Model enables the strongest government control over healthcare spending through budget allocation
  • Bismarck and NHI models have higher administrative costs but still achieve universal coverage
  • Out-of-Pocket Model places the greatest financial burden on individuals, leading to delayed care and worse outcomes

Funding mechanisms for healthcare

• General taxation
  • Beveridge Model relies on tax revenue to finance government-owned healthcare facilities
  • National Health Insurance Model uses tax revenue to fund a single-payer insurance program
• Employer and employee contributions
  • Bismarck Model requires mandatory contributions from employers and employees to finance insurance funds
• Individual payments for services
  • Out-of-Pocket Model relies on direct payments from patients to providers at the point of care
• Combination of funding mechanisms
  • Some countries use a mix of general taxation, employer/employee contributions, and individual payments to finance healthcare