Recent authors have proposed that waiting times for elective treatment should be reduced to the point where the costs of doing so exceed the benefits. This paper considers how this criterion could be put into effect. Taking benefits first it argues that these could be estimated in three different ways – social cost benefit, clinical and user valuation – that would not necessarily produce consistent results and hence a choice has to be made between them. It then considers the costs of reducing waits and argues, citing relevant evidence, that these may range widely according to whether or not reductions can be achieved through simple management measures or whether more long-term capacity is required. It concludes therefore that the apparently simple criterion proposed for defining the point where waiting times are optimal is hard to establish. Choice of criterion must be made in the light of the overall values that a given health care system is intended to promote.

Public long-term care insurance (LTCI), which provides home and institutional care benefits, was introduced in July 2008 in South Korea. This study aims to evaluate the effects of the introduction of LTCI on older people's medical service use, including outpatient visits, inpatient services and longer stays (181 days or longer) in hospitals by implementing a quasi-experiment design with a generalised difference-in-difference method. The results showed that the introduction of LTCI did not change the use of outpatient medical services, although the medical costs of older people who used medical services at least once decreased by 9.4%. For the inpatient services, hospitalisation rates declined by 2.7% as a result of the LTCI. Length of stay and inpatient expenses decreased by 15.6 and 9.5%, respectively. For older people of LTC grade 2, eligible for long-term care facilities (LTCF), prolonged hospitalisation rates decreased by 1.6% due to the LTCI. In conclusion, the introduction of LTCI in South Korea has contributed to decreasing the use of inpatient services and longer stays in hospitals, which suggests that the utilisation of LTCF has become a substitute for some social admissions in hospitals.

This article investigates the impact of Certificate of Need (CON) laws on competition in the inpatient care market. One of the major criticisms of these laws is that it may hinder competition in the health care market, which can lead to higher prices. However, from a theoretical standpoint, CON laws could also promote competition by limiting excessive expansion from incumbents. Our main conclusion is that CON laws by and large enhanced competition in the inpatient market during the period of our study. This indicates that the effects of CON laws to hinder predatory behavior could dominate its effects of preventing new entrants into the inpatient care market. We do not find statistically significant evidence to reject the exogeneity assumption of either CON laws or their stringency in our study. We also find factors such as proportion of population aged 18–44, proportion of Asian American population, obesity rate, political environment, etc., in a state significantly impact competition. Our findings could shed some light to public policy makers when deciding the appropriate health programs or legislative framework to promote health care market competition and thereby facilitate quality health care.

Dr Anna Dixon, Chief Executive at the Centre for Ageing Better, examines the issues around an ageing population, how we have reached this stage and offers potential solutions to the problems it presents. Her book, The Age of Ageing Better? turns the misleading and depressing narrative of burden and massive extra cost of people living longer on its head and shows how our society could thrive if we started thinking differently. She presents a refreshingly optimistic vision for the future that could change the way we value later life in every sense.

Health technology assessments (HTAs) are used as a policy tool to appraise the clinical value, or cost effectiveness, of new medicines to inform reimbursement decisions in health care. As HTA organisations have been established in different countries, it has become clear that the outcomes of medicine appraisals can vary from country to country, even though the same scientific evidence in the form of randomised controlled trials is available. The extant literature explains such variations with reference to institutional variables and administrative rules. However, little research has been conducted to advance the theoretical understanding of how variations in HTA outcomes might be explained. This paper compares cases of HTA in England and Germany using insights from Kuhn (1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press) and Hall (1993, Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics 25, 275–296) to demonstrate how policy paradigms can explain the outcomes of HTA processes. The paper finds that HTA outcomes are influenced by a combination of logical issues that require reasoning within a paradigm, and institutional and political issues that speak to the interaction between ideational and interest-based variables. It sets out an approach that advances the theoretical explanation of divergent HTA outcomes, and offers an analytical basis on which to assess current and future policy changes in HTA.

The adoption of new medical technologies often generates losses in efficiency associated with the excess or insufficient acquisition of new equipment, an inappropriate choice (in terms of economic and clinical parameters) of medical equipment, and its poor use. Russia is a good example for exploring the problem of the ineffective adoption of new medical technologies due to the massive public investment in new equipment for medical institutions in 2006–2013. This study examines the procurement of new technologies in Russian hospitals to find the main causes of inefficiency. The research strategy was based on in-depth semistructured interviews with representatives of prominent actors (regional health care authorities, hospital executives, senior physicians). The main result is that inefficiencies arise from the contradiction between hospitals’ and authorities’ motivation for acquiring new technologies: hospitals tend to adopt technologies which bring benefits to their department heads and physicians and minimize maintenance and servicing costs, while the authorities’ main concern is the initial cost of the technology.

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is framed as beneficial for individuals and for the health system. However, little is known about the extent of involvement, or of its impact. Based on data from Sweden, we show that apart from voting in regional elections (76%), more people reported involvement as individual patients (23%) than part of collective activities (5%) or activities relating to a citizen perspective (4%). There was no correlation between how many people participated and the estimated impact – which was generally low. More extensive involvement is thus not linked to the potential to influence decisions. We argue that to achieve the benefits associated with PPI it is crucial to understand more about people's motivation for being involved and what underlies low estimates of impact. This requires a more systematic approach to involvement, how it is evaluated and its results communicated to participants and the society. We also argue that a future challenge for the Swedish health system, and for other similar health systems, is to support long-term collective involvement in the midst of growing individualization of health services and involvement opportunities primarily intended for patients.

Recent policy developments in public health care systems lead to a greater diversity in health care. Decentralization, either geographically or at an institutional level, is the key force, because it encourages innovation and local initiatives in health care provision. The devolution of responsibilities allows for a sort of ‘deconstruction’ of the status quo by changing both organizational forms and service provision. The new organizations enjoy greater freedom in the way they pay their staff, and are judged according to the results. These organizations may retain financial surpluses, develop ‘spin-off’ companies, and commission a range of specialized services (such as Diagnostic and Treatment Centres in UK) from providers outside the institutional setting in order to have more access to capital markets. However, this diversity may generate a feeling of a lack of commitment to a national health service and ultimately a loss of social cohesion. Through fiscal decentralization to regional authorities or planned delegation of financial agreements to providers, financial incentives are more explicit and may seem to place profit making above a commitment to better health care. An evaluation of the ‘myths and realities’ of the decentralization process is needed. Here, I offer an assessment of the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of the health care decentralization process in Spain, drawing on the experience of regional reforms from the pioneering organizational innovations implemented in Catalonia in 1981, up to the currently observed dispersion of health care spending per capita across the regions.

A moratorium in the US on referrals of Medicare and Medicaid patients to new cardiac, orthopedic, or surgical specialty hospitals by physician-investors was recently lifted, yet the considerable controversy stirred by this growing hospital organizational form continues. This paper calls attention to the peculiar trade-offs introduced by entry of these specialty hospitals, and highlights distinctions among their different types. New policy approaches should be open to the notion that all physician-owned specialty hospitals need not necessarily be regulated in the same way. And caution will be required not to compromise the capacity of community general hospitals to service more complex patients and to maintain the social safety net.

Patient safety, and more broadly the quality of care, is typically discussed with reference to the reduction of preventable adverse events within hospitals and adherence to practice guidelines on care processes. We call it the ‘care-centered approach’ and recognize that the United States is a leader in the field. Another face of patient safety and care quality may be defined as the ‘system-centered approach’. It focuses on access to a timely and effective continuum of health-care services – clinical prevention, primary care and appropriate referral to and receipt of specialty care. Although France's efforts to pursue a care-centered approach to patient safety are limited, its system-centered approach yields some benefits. Based on the evidence we have reviewed for access to primary care (hospital discharges for avoidable hospital conditions), mortality amenable to medical intervention and consumer satisfaction, in the United States and France, there appear to be good grounds for bolstering the system-centered approach in the United States.

The End of Life Care Strategy (Department of Health, 2008) radically raised the profile of end-of-life care in England, signalling the need for development in planning and delivery, to ensure that individuals are able to exercise genuine choice in how and where they are cared for and die. Research has indicated that there have been continuing difficulties in access to high-quality and appropriate support at the end of life, particularly for patients with a diagnosis other than cancer. This article uses research findings from three case studies of end-of-life care delivery in England to highlight some of the barriers that continue to exist, and understand these challenges in more depth. Access to high-quality and appropriate end-of-life care has been a challenge for all patients nearing the end of life. However, the findings from this research indicate that there are several interrelated reasons why access to end-of-life care services can be more difficult for patients with a non-cancer diagnosis. These issues relate to differences in disease trajectories and subsequent care planning, which are further entrenched by existing funding arrangements.

This article explores the development of two policies for the governance of medical performance in the UK: the Department of Health's (DH) clinical governance policy and the medical profession's revalidation policy. After discussing the institutional context in which each of these policies emerged, we examine how and why they were constructed. While the clinical governance policy was in large part a swift reaction to high-profile cases of medical misconduct in the late 1990s, revalidation was the profession's response to the politicisation of its self-regulatory apparatus. The profession took notably longer than the DH to piece together its policy as a result of internal disagreements about the role clinical standards should play in the evaluation of a doctor's fitness to practice. Following the Fifth Report of the Shipman Inquiry in late 2004, the government stepped in and eventually introduced legislation that modifies the profession's policy. With clinical governance, the state – via arms-length regulatory organisations – has entered the clinic in new ways, strengthening hierarchy-based forms of governance in the governance of medical performance. However, the success of hierarchical forms of governance is likely to be restricted by the lack of a clear system of sanctioning and the state's reliance on a lengthy chain of command in the National Health Service for the implementation of clinical standards.

There is a popular belief that drug launch is delayed in developing countries like India because of delayed transfer of technology due to a ‘post-launch’ imitation threat through weak intellectual property rights (IPR). In fact, this belief has been a major reason for the imposition of the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights regime under the WTO. This construct undermines the fact that in countries like India, with high reverse engineering capabilities, imitation can occur even before the formal technology transfer, and fails to recognize the first mover advantage in pharmaceutical markets. This paper argues that the first mover advantage is important and will vary across therapeutic areas, especially in developing countries with diverse levels of patient enlightenment and quality awareness. We construct a game theoretic model of incomplete information to examine the delay in drug launch in terms of costs and benefits of first move, assumed to be primarily a function of the therapeutic area of the new drug. Our model shows that drug launch will be delayed only for external (infective/communicable) diseases, while drugs for internal, non-communicable diseases (accounting for the overwhelming majority of new drug discovery) will be launched without delay.

The Affordable Care Act requires all insurance plans sold on health insurance marketplaces and individual and small-group plans to cover 10 Essential Health Benefits (EHB), including behavioral health services. Instead of applying a uniform EHB plan design, the Department of Health and Human Services let states define their own EHB plan. This approach was seen as the best balance between flexibility and comprehensiveness, and assumed there would be little state-to-state variation. Limited federal oversight runs the risk of variation in EHB coverage definitions and requirements, as well as potential divergence from standardized medical guidelines. We analyzed 112 EHB documents from all states for behavioral health coverage in effect from 2012 to 2017. We find wide variation among states in their EHB plan required-coverage, and divergence between medical-practice guidelines and EHB plans. These results emphasize consideration of federated regulation over health insurance coverage standards. Federal flexibility in states benefit design nods to state-specific policymaking-processes and population needs. However, flexibility becomes problematic if it leads to inadequate coverage that reduces access to critical health care services. The EHBs demonstrate an incomplete effort to establish appropriate minimum standards of coverage for behavioral health services.

In response to predictions that population ageing will increase government spending over the coming decades, in 1997–98, the Australian Government introduced means-tested income fees and accommodation charges for those admitted to nursing homes with income and assets above set threshold levels. Immediately prior, all residents paid the same price for their care and were not required to contribute towards the cost of their accommodation. In addition, in relation to those eligible to pay a higher price, the Government reduced its subsidisation of the cost of their care. The Government anticipated that the initiative would more equitably share the cost of age-related services across the public and private sectors, and result in some cost savings for itself. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of the policy on the average price paid by residents. The findings suggest that the policy may have contributed to an increase in the average price paid, but statistical evidence is limited due to a number of data issues. Results also indicate that the rate of increase in the price was greater after the Residential Aged Care Structural Reform package was introduced. The study contributes to the economic analysis of the sector by evaluating time series estimates of prices paid by residents since the early 1970s.

This paper explores the impact of employer-provided health insurance on hospital competition and hospital mergers. Under employer-provided health insurance, employer executives act as agents for their employees in selecting health insurance options for their firm. The paper investigates whether a merger of hospitals favored by executives will result in a larger price increase than a merger of competing hospitals elsewhere. This is found to be the case even when the executive has the same opportunity cost of travel as her employees and even when the executive is the sole owner of the firm, retaining all profits. This is consistent with the Federal Trade Commission's findings in its challenge of Evanston Northwestern Healthcare's acquisition of Highland Park Hospital. Implications of the model are further tested with executive location data and hospital data from Florida and Texas.

For well over 40 years, the United States has struggled to improve end-of-life care. This effort, heavily focused on living wills, hospice and improved doctor–patient communications and palliative care, has been a modest success only. Both doctors and patients are often unwilling to accept the fact that death is on the way – only 25% of Americans have an advance directive. Advances in medical technology have provided more ways of keeping dying patients alive, making the line between living and dying harder to discern. The way physicians are paid promotes the use of technology not for talking with patients. Underlying these practical problems is a culture of American medicine with deep historical roots: that medical progress should be unending and is a moral imperative, that death is the greatest enemy and that cure, not care, is the primary goal. A better balance between care and cure is needed.

Right-wing health policy is alive and well in the United States. Pro-business and libertarian health policy advocacy groups, generously funded by right-wing foundations (and, in some instances, by the health care industry), produce a continuous stream of press releases, policy-statements, books, articles, and symposia, as well as testimony before legislative and administrative bodies. Their positions are taken very seriously by the American media, who make certain that right-wing policy experts are represented in any discussion of current health policy issues.