Most developed democracies have faced the challenge of priority setting in health care by setting up specialized agencies to take decisions on which medical services to include in public health baskets. Under the influence of Daniels and Sabin’s seminal work on the topic, agencies increasingly aim to fulfil criteria of procedural justice, such as accountability and transparency. We assume, however, that the institutional design of agencies also and necessarily reflects substantial value judgments on the respective weight of distributive principles such as efficiency, need and equality. The public acceptance of prioritization decisions, and eventually of the health care system at large, will ultimately depend not only on considerations of procedural fairness, but also on the congruence between a society’s values and its institutions. We study social values, institutions and decisions in three countries (France, Germany and the United Kingdom) in order to assess such congruence and formulate expectations on its effects.

This study examined the role of prospective payment systems in the adoption of new medical technologies across different countries. A literature review was conducted to provide background for the study and guide development of a survey instrument. The survey was disseminated to hospital payment systems experts in 15 jurisdictions. Fifty-one surveys were disseminated, with 34 returned. The surveys returned covered 14 of the 15 jurisdictions invited to participate. The majority (71%) of countries update the patient classification system and/or payment tariffs on an annual basis to try to account for new technologies. Use of short-term separate or supplementary payments for new technologies occurs in 79% of countries to ensure adequate funding and facilitate adoption. A minority (43%) of countries use evidence of therapeutic benefit and/or costs to determine or update payment tariffs, although it is somewhat more common in establishing short-term payments. The main barrier to using evidence is uncertain or unavailable clinical evidence. Almost three-fourths of respondents believed diagnosis-related group systems incentivize or deter technology adoption, depending on the particular circumstances. Improvements are needed, such as enhanced strategies for evidence generation and linking evidence of value to payments, national and international collaboration and training to improve existing practice, and flexible timelines for short-term payments. Importantly, additional research is needed to understand how different payment policies impact technology uptake as well as quality of care and costs.

Since the onset of the global financial crisis (GFC), health spending has slowed markedly or fallen in many OECD countries after years of continuous growth. However, health spending patterns across the 34 countries of the OECD have been affected to varying degrees. This article examines in more detail the observed downturn in health expenditure growth, analysing which countries and which sectors of health spending have been most affected. In addition, using more recent preliminary data for a subset of countries, this article tries to shed light on the prospects for health spending trends. Given that public sources account for around three-quarters of total spending on health on average across the OECD, and, in an overall context of managing public deficits, the article focuses on the specific areas of public spending that have been most affected. This study also tries to link the observed trends with some of the main policy measures and instruments put in place by countries. The investigation finds that while nearly all OECD countries have seen health spending growth decrease since 2009, there is wide variation as to the extent of the slowdown, with some countries outside of Europe continuing to see significant growth in health spending. While all sectors of spending appear to have been affected, initial analysis appears to show the greatest decreases has been experienced in pharmaceutical spending and in areas of public health and prevention.

Nearly one in eight infants in the United States is born preterm. A variety of factors are associated with preterm birth, including multiplicity. In the United States fertility treatments are currently associated with high rates of multiplicity, but these rates could be reduced significantly if changes can be made to fertility treatment policy and practice. These include reducing the financial pressure on patients to prioritize pregnancy chances over safety by expanding insurance coverage and altering the way we calculate success rates and insurance benefits so that two consecutive single embryo transfers is equivalent to one double embryo transfer.

While there is evidence that weight-loss interventions reduce morbidity, indications of their acceptability are limited. Understanding preferences for lifestyle interventions will help policymakers design interventions. We used a discrete choice experiment to investigate preferences for lifestyle interventions to reduce adult obesity. Attributes focused on: the components of the programme; weight change; short-term and longer-term health gains; time spent on the intervention and financial costs incurred. Data were collected through a web-based questionnaire, with 504 UK adults responding. Despite evidence that dietary interventions are the most effective way to lose weight, respondents preferred lifestyle interventions involving physical activity. While the evidence suggests that behaviour change support improves effectiveness of interventions, its value to participants was limited. A general preference to maintain current lifestyles, together with the sensitivity of take up to financial costs, suggests financial incentives could be used to help maximise uptake of healthy lifestyle interventions. An important target group for change, men, required more compensation to take up healthier lifestyles. Those of normal weight, who will increase in weight over time if they do not change their lifestyle, required the highest compensation. Policymakers face challenges in inducing people to change their behaviour and adopt healthy lifestyles.

At present, health systems across Europe face the same challenges: a changing demographic profile, a rise in multi-morbidity and long-term conditions, increasing health care costs, large public debts and other legacies of an economic downturn. In light of these concerns, this article provides an overview of the international evidence on how to improve productive efficiency in secondary care settings. Updating and expanding upon a recent review of the literature by Hurst and Williams (2012), we set out evidence on potential interventions in the policy environment, hospital management, and operational processes. We conclude with five key lessons for policy makers and practitioners on how to improve productive efficiency within hospital settings, and identify several gaps in the existing evidence base.

Thailand is among the first non-OECD countries to have introduced a form of Universal Health Coverage (UHC). This policy represents a natural experiment to evaluate the effects of public health insurance on health behaviours. In this paper, we examine the impact of Thailand’s UHC programme on preventive activities, unhealthy or risky behaviours and health care consumption using data from the Thai Health and Welfare Survey. We use doubly robust estimators that combine propensity scores and linear regressions to estimate differences-in-differences (DD) and differences-in-DD models. Our results offer important insights. First, UHC increases individuals’ likelihood of having an annual check-up, especially among women. Regarding health care consumption, we observe that UHC increases hospital admissions by over 2% and increases outpatient visits by 13%. However, there is no evidence that UHC leads to an increase in unhealthy behaviours or a reduction of preventive efforts. In other words, we find no evidence of ex ante moral hazard. Overall, these findings suggest positive health impacts among the Thai population covered by UHC.

In a 2011 article published in this journal, Baker et al. set out to resolve a nasty dilemma for NICE by reconciling two approaches for determining whether adopting a new intervention would increase total health gains produced from available resources and hence increase system efficiency. In this response we show how the proposed reconciliation, as well as the two approaches on which it is based, fail to inform decision makers about the efficiency of a new intervention. We show how this arises from the misuse of incremental costs and effects of between-intervention comparisons as measures of changes in costs and effects associated with marginal adjustments to the scale of an intervention. Ironically, incremental data represent the choices faced by decision makers and we illustrate a method for determining unambiguously whether a new intervention represents an improvement in efficiency.

Seen from the perspective of health, the global financial crisis (GFC) may be conceived of as an exogenous factor that has undermined the fiscal sustainability of European welfare states and consequently, their (expanding) health systems as well. Being one of the core programs of European welfare states, health care has always belonged to the sovereignty of European Member States. However, in past two decades, European welfare states have in fact become semi-sovereign states and the European Union (EU) no longer is an exogenous actor in European health policy making. Today, the EU not only puts limits to unsustainable growth levels in health care spending, it also acts as an health policy agenda setter. Since the outbreak of the GFC, it does so in an increasingly coercive and persuasive way, claiming authority over health system reforms alongside the responsibilities of its Member States.

World Health Organization estimates that obesity accounts for 2–8% of health care costs in different parts of Europe, and highlights a key role for national policymaking in curbing the epidemic. A variety of healthy-eating policy instruments are available, ranging from more paternalistic policies to those less intrusive. Our aim is to measure and explain the level of public support for different types of healthy eating policy in Europe, based on data from a probabilistic sample of 3003 respondents in five European countries. We find that the main drivers of policy support are attitudinal factors, especially attribution of obesity to excessive availability of unhealthy foods, while socio-demographic characteristics and political preferences have little explanatory power. A high level of support for healthy eating policy does not translate into acceptance of higher taxes to fund them, however.

Black medicine represents the most problematic configuration of informal payments for health care. According to the accepted economic explanations, we would not expect to find black medicine in a system with a developed private service. Using Israel as a case study, we suggest an alternative yet a complimentary explanation for the emergence of black medicine in public health care systems – even though citizens do have the formal option to use private channels. We claim that when regulation is weak and political culture is based on ‘do it yourself’ strategies, which meant to solve immediate problems, blurring the boundaries between public and private health care services may only reduce public trust and in turn, contribute to the emergence of black medicine. We used a combined quantitative and qualitative methodology to support our claim. Statistical analysis of the results suggested that the only variable significantly associated with the use of black medicine was trust in the health care system. The higher the respondents’ level of trust in the health care system, the lower the rate of the use of black medicine. Qualitatively, interviewee emphasized the relation between the blurred boundaries between public and private health care and the use of black medicine.

This perspective reviews key institutional and organizational patterns in Swedish health care over the last 30 years, probing the roots of several complicated policy questions that concern present-day Swedish decision-makers. It explores in particular the ongoing structural tension between stability, on the one hand, and the necessary levels of innovation and dynamism demanded by the current period of major clinical, technological, economic, social and supranational (EU) change. Where useful, the article compares Swedish developments with those in the other three European Nordic countries as well as other northern European health systems. Sweden’s health sector evolution can provide valuable insight for other countries into the complexity involved in re-thinking tradeoffs between policies that emphasize stability as against those that encourage innovation in health sector governance and provision.

Denmark, Finland and Sweden have experienced two major recessions during the last 25 years. The adjustments to the earlier crisis in the late 1980s (Denmark) and early 1990s (Finland and Sweden) resembled the policies in many other European countries during the present crisis. The analysis of relationship of deep economic crises and growth period between them to the health system policies and institutions in the three countries from the 1980s to 2013 is based on a categorisation of reactions to external shocks as path conforming or path breaking. The results of the empirical long-term trends show that the reactions to deep recessions have been mainly temporary adjustments and acceleration of changes already prepared before economic crisis. The economic crisis in the three countries has not been ‘good enough’ to enable paradigmatic changes in the Nordic public, decentralised and equity-oriented health systems. Changes such as the slow privatisation in care funding and production and the adoption of new management practices indicate an ongoing paradigmatic change related to longer-term societal, ideological and political developments rather than directly to economic crises or growth.