The effect of health-care privatisation on the quality of care

Over the past 40 years, many health-care systems that were once publicly owned or financed have moved towards privatising their services, primarily through outsourcing to the private sector. But what has the impact been of privatisation on the quality of care? A key aim of this transition is to improve quality of care through increased market competition along with the benefits of a more flexible and patient-centred private sector. However, concerns have been raised that these reforms could result in worse care, in part because it is easier to reduce costs than increase quality of health care. Many of these reforms took place decades ago and there have been numerous studies that have examined their effects on the quality of care received by patients. We reviewed this literature, focusing on the effects of outsourcing health-care services in high-income countries. We found that hospitals converting from public to private ownership status tended to make higher profits than public hospitals that do not convert, primarily through the selective intake of patients and reductions to staff numbers. We also found that aggregate increases in privatisation frequently corresponded with worse health outcomes for patients. Very few studies evaluated this important reform and there are many gaps in the literature. However, based on the evidence available, our Review provides evidence that challenges the justifications for health-care privatisation and concludes that the scientific support for further privatisation of health-care services is weak.

Policy Discourses: Shifting the Burden of Healthcare from the State to the Market in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia has modified from a predominantly free, public, and comprehensive system under a welfare model to more of a mixed-economy model of healthcare. The welfare state slowly moved to a liberal model, emphasizing market forces to dominate in the provision of healthcare and the private sector was trusted to provide a better provision of healthcare. The country has to confront enormous problems in the health sector due to population growth, lifestyle changes, the shift of disease patterns, elevated expectations, escalated healthcare costs, limited infrastructure and resources, and poor management practice in the provision of healthcare. Moreover, the government has been emphasizing the need to bring in private sector investment to improve quality and efficiency, development of manpower, and standardization of services. As the current pattern of healthcare is unsustainable, the country is planning to restructure the present healthcare system toward institutionalizing it to meet future challenges. The governments must make an appropriate amount of effort to build their healthcare systems by transforming and modifying the challenges faced by society and its political-economic systems. The government should encourage equity, and fairness in the provision of healthcare.

The privatisation of healthcare system in Bangladesh

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to examine the factors that triggered the privatisation of Bangladesh's health sector.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

This study follows systematic reviews in its undertaking and is based on an extensive review of both published and unpublished documents. Different search engines and databases were used to collect the materials. The study takes into account of various research publications, journal articles, government reports, policy and planning documents, relevant press reports/articles, and reports and discussion papers from the World Health Organization, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

FINDINGS

While Bangladesh's healthcare sector has undergone an increasing trend towards privatisation, this move has limited benefits on the overall improvement in the health of the people of Bangladesh. The public sector should remain vital, and the government must remobilise it to provide better provision of healthcare.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

The paper focusses only on the public policy aspect of privatisation in healthcare of a country.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The paper examines the issue of privatisation of healthcare and concludes that privatisation not only makes services more expensive, but also diminishes equity and accountability in the provision of services. The study, first, makes a spate of observations on improving public healthcare resources, which can be of value to key decision makers and stakeholders in the healthcare sector. It also discourages the move towards private sector interventions.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This study is an independent explanation of a country's healthcare system. Lesson learned from this study could also be used for developing public policy in similar socio-economic contexts.

Medical Students' Opinions About the Commercialization of Healthcare: A Cross-Sectional Survey

There are serious concerns about the commercialization of healthcare and adoption of the business approach in medicine. As market dynamics endanger established professional values, healthcare workers face more complicated ethical dilemmas in their daily practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the willingness of medical students to accept the assertions of commercialized healthcare and the factors affecting their level of agreement, factors which could influence their moral stance when market demands conflict with professional values. A cross-sectional study was conducted in three medical schools in Turkey. The study population consisted of first-, third-, and sixth-year students, and 1,781 students participated in total. Students were asked to state if they agreed with the assertions of commercialized healthcare. Of all students, 87.2 per cent agreed with at least one of the assertions, and one-fifth (20.8 per cent) of them agreed with more than half of the assertions. First-year students significantly agreed more with some assertions than third- and sixth-year students. Being female, having mid-level family income, choosing medicine due to idealistic reasons, and being in the third or sixth years of medical study increased the probability of disagreement. Also, studying in a medical school that included integrated lectures on health policies, rights related to health, and health inequities, along with early field visits, increased the probability of disagreement. This study suggests that agreement with the assertions of commercialized healthcare might be prevalent among students at a considerable level. We argue that this level of agreement is not compatible with best practice in professional ethics and indicates the need for an educational intervention in order to have physicians who give priority to patients' best interests in the face of market demands.

Staff retention after the privatization of township-village health centers: a case study from the Haimen City of East China

Background

Township-village health centers in rural areas play an important role in health service system in China. In East China’s Jiangsu Province, the City of Haimen privatized all 25 township-village health centers in 2002. This study assesses the effect of privatization on staff retention among these health centers.

Methods

This is a retrospective study based on 10-year administrative data from Haimen City. Three waves of administrative data were collected in 2000 (2 years before privatization), 2005 (3 years after privatization) and 2009 (7 years after privatization) for all health care providers in Haimen City, including 3 county hospitals, 6 central township health centers (CTHC) and 25 township-village health centers (TVHC). The effect of privatization on TVHCs’ staff retention was evaluated in comparison with the other two types of health care providers. We conducted focus groups with people from Haimen Bureau of Health and various health care providers to help understand the context of these administrative statistics.

Results

Each township-village health centers had an average of 40 staff members before the privatization, and the majority of those staff members were their permanent staff. In 2005, three years after the privatization, a substantial amount of staff decrease (from 39.7 staff members per TVHC to 27.5 per TVHC) occurred in these township-village health centers. From 2000 to 2009, the total payroll in TVHCs decreased by almost 29%, while the number of their permanent staff members and nurses decreased by more than 40%. Among the two types of health care providers that did not go through a privatization, those central township health centers had no significant change on their payroll size during this period whereas the county hospitals’ average payroll size actually increased by 20%, especially for the number of doctors. In addition, the average salary and caseload in TVHC showed similar decreasing trends from 2000 to 2009, while no such trends can be observed among the other two types of providers that did not undergo privatization.

Conclusion

The privatization of township-village health center could have adverse effects on their staff retention, a phenomenon that occurs with a decrease in salary and caseload in these centers. To ensure that these health institutions keep providing health care for rural communities, a stronger social safety net and stronger financing of rural health insurance might be helpful in their staff retention.