The election of Donald Trump, coupled with the retention of Republican majorities in the US House of Representatives and Senate, raises questions about future of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the structure and funding of the country’s public health insurance programs – Medicare, Medicaid and the Child Health Insurance Program – and the direction of health policy in the United States, more generally. Political scientists are not renowned for their capacity to predict the future and many of those who forecast election results have received criticism in recent weeks for failing to predict the Trump victory. While the future is uncertain, it is possible for social scientists to offer a ‘conditional causal analysis’ about the future. This essay is an effort to think about the likely shape of American health care between now and the next US presidential election.

In January 2017, the UK Government made public a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Department of Health, National Health Service (NHS) Digital and the Home Office. This Memorandum allows for the more expedited sharing of a patient’s non-clinical data, specifically from the NHS England to the Home Office. The Government justified the MoU as in the ‘public interest to support effective immigration enforcement’. In this review, we seek to unpack this justification by providing, first, a background to the MoU, placing it in the context of creating a ‘hostile environment’ for migrants – a project initially sought by Theresa May in her time as Home Secretary. We then explore the potential impact of data sharing on individual health, public health and on health professionals. We conclude that the MoU could threaten both individual and public health, while placing health professionals in an unworkable position both practically and in terms of their duties to patients around confidentiality. As such, we agree with colleagues’ position that it should be suspended, at least until a full consultation and health impact assessment can be carried out.

Health systems have repeatedly addressed concerns about efficiency and equity by employing trans-national comparisons to draw out the strengths and weaknesses of specific policy initiatives. This paper demonstrates the potential for explicit historical analysis of waiting times for hospital treatment to add value to spatial comparative methodologies. Waiting times and the size of the lists of waiting patients have become key operational indicators. In the United Kingdom, as National Health Service (NHS) financial pressures intensified from the 1970s, waiting times have become a topic for regular public and political debate. Various explanations for waiting times include the following: hospital consultants manipulate NHS waiting lists to maintain their private practice; there is under-investment in the NHS; and available (and adequate) resources are being used inefficiently. Other countries have also experienced ongoing tensions between the public and private delivery of universal health care in which national and trans-national comparisons of waiting times have been regularly used. The paper discusses the development of key UK policies, and provides a limited Canadian comparative perspective, to explore wider issues, including whether ‘waiting crises’ were consciously used by policymakers, especially those brought into government to implement new economic and managerial strategies, to diminish the autonomy and authority of the medical professional in the hospital environment.

Different countries have adopted different strategies for tackling the challenge of allocating scarce health care resources fairly. Norway is one of the countries that has pioneered the effort to resolve priority setting by using a core set of priority-setting criteria. While the criteria themselves have been subject to extensive debate and numerous revisions, the question of how the criteria have been applied in practice has received less attention. In this paper, we examine how the criteria feature in the decisions and justifications of the Norwegian National Council for Priority Setting in Health Care, which has played an active role in deliberating about health care provision and coverage in Norway. We conducted a comprehensive document analysis, looking at the Council’s decisions about health care allocation as well as the reasons they had provided to justify their decisions. We found that although the Council often made use of the official priority-setting criteria, they did so in an unsystematic and inconsistent manner.

The analysis of efficiency in health care has largely focussed either on individual health care providers, or on sub-national health systems conceived as a unique decision-making unit. However, in hierarchically organized national health services, two separate entities are responsible for turning financial resources into services at the local level: health administrations and health care providers. Their separate roles and the one of health administrations in particular have not been explicitly considered in efficiency analysis. We applied stochastic frontier analysis to district-level panel data from Mozambique (2008-2011) to assess district efficiency in delivering outpatient care. We first assessed the efficiency of the whole district considered as an individual decision-making unit, and then we assessed separately the efficiency of health administrations and health care providers within the same district. We found that on average only 73% of the outpatient consultations deliverable using available inputs were realized, with large differences in performance across districts. Individual districts performed differently in administrative or health care delivery functions. On average, a reduction of administrative inefficiency by 10 percentage points, for a given expenditure would increase by 0.2% the volume of services delivered per thousand population per year. Identifying and targeting the specific drivers of administrative inefficiencies can contribute to increase service.

At present, the professional skills of the historian are rarely relied upon when health policies are being formulated. There are numerous reasons for this, one of which is the natural desire of decision-makers to break with the past when enacting big bang policy change. This article identifies the strengths professional historians bring to bear on policy development using the establishment and subsequent reform of universal health coverage as an example. Historians provide pertinent and historically informed context; isolate the forces that have historically allowed for major reform; and separate the truly novel reforms from those attempted or implemented in the past. In addition, the historian’s use of primary sources allows potentially new and highly salient facts to guide the framing of the policy problem and its solution. This paper argues that historians are critical for constructing a viable narrative of the establishment and evolution of universal health coverage policies. The lack of this narrative makes it difficult to achieve an accurate assessment of systemic gaps in coverage and access, and the design or redesign of universal health coverage that can successfully close these gaps.

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.

This article identifies the interests and policy positions of key health policy stakeholders regarding the creation of a health technology assessment (HTA) agency in the Czech Republic, and what considerations influenced them. Vested interests have been suggested as a factor mitigating the diffusion of HTA bodies internationally. The Czech Republic recently considered and discarded establishing an HTA agency, making it a good case for studying actors’ policy positions throughout the policy debates. Findings are based on in-depth, semi-structured expert and elite interviews with 34 key Czech health policy actors, supported by document analysis and extensive triangulation. Findings show that the HTA epistemic community of ‘aspiring agents’ was the only actor strongly in favor of an HTA body. Payers and the medical device and diagnostics industry were against it; patients and clinicians had no clear preferences. Original decision-makers were in favor but a new minister of health opted for a simpler policy alternative to solve his need for expertise. Existing institutions, policy alternatives and the institutional design of a future HTA body influence domestic actors’ preferences for or against an HTA agency. Domestic and international proponents of HTA should give serious thought to their concerns when advocating for HTA bodies.

Setting prices for elective patient treatments in private for-profit (PFP) hospitals in traditional tax-funded health systems is challenging since both the organisation of these hospitals and the tasks they perform differ considerably from what we find in public hospitals. From the year 2000, Norway became one of a few countries to gradually implement a procurement system based on competitive tendering when outsourcing elective surgery. In this study we analyse the effect of introducing competitive tendering on the prices paid to PFP hospitals. Pricing data were collected from the formal contracts awarded to PFP hospitals and defined in terms of both absolute and relative prices. We found that PFP hospitals performed day surgeries at markedly lower prices than public hospitals and that competitive tendering triggered the price reduction. We speculate that the PFP hospitals’ lack of acute services, less severe patient population, reduced teaching responsibilities and ability to streamline production, as well as other factors, explain the lower prices at PFP hospitals.

Public involvement in disinvestment decision making in health care is widely advocated, and in some cases legally mandated. However, attempts to involve the public in other areas of health policy have been accused of tokenism and manipulation. This paper presents research into the views of local health care leaders in the English National Health Service (NHS) with regards to the involvement of citizens and local communities in disinvestment decision making. The research includes a Q study and follow-up interviews with a sample of health care clinicians and managers in senior roles in the English NHS. It finds that whilst initial responses suggest high levels of support for public involvement, further probing of attitudes and experiences shows higher levels of ambivalence and risk aversion and a far more cautious overall stance. This study has implications for the future of disinvestment activities and public involvement in health care systems faced with increased resource constraint. Recommendations are made for future research and practice.

Medicare shifted the emphasis for mental health care into outpatient psychiatric wings connected to general hospitals and away from large custodial facilities that had been at the centre of the mental health system for decades. The shift to care in the community expanded the patient population, and arguably improved mental health care for many individuals who could now seek a variety of outpatient services rather than succumb to long-stay institutionalization. However, this shift also introduced new challenges as patients were increasingly expected to take responsibility for their own health care plans, whether that involved doctors’ appointments, drug regimens, or the need to find sheltered employment, safe housing and a social support network. Analysing first-hand experiences suggests that despite the need for clinical care at times, the major challenges to independence are political and economic. In this paper, I examine some of these tradeoffs and consider some of the historical lessons for continued discussions on public policy in the mental health care arena.

What health insurance should cover and pay for represents one of the most complex questions in national health policy. Israel shares with the US reliance on a regulated insurance market and we compare the approaches of the two countries regarding determining health benefits. Based on review and analysis of literature, laws and policy in the United States and Israel. The Israeli experience consists of selection of a starting point for defining coverage; calculating the expected cost of covered benefits; and creating a mechanism for updating covered benefits within a defined budget. In implementing the Affordable Care Act, the US rejected a comprehensive and detailed approach to essential health benefits. Instead, federal regulators established broadly worded minimum standards that can be supplemented through more stringent state laws and insurer discretion. Notwithstanding differences between the two systems, the elements of the Israeli approach to coverage, which has stood the test of time, may provide a basis for the United States as it renews its health reform debate and considers delegating decisions about coverage to the states. Israel can learn to emulate the more forceful regulation of supplemental and private insurance that characterizes health policy in the United States.

The Canada Health Act 1984 (CHA) is considered foundational to Canada’s publicly funded health care system (known as Medicare). The CHA provides for the federal transfer of funding to the provinces/territories, in exchange for provincial/territorial adherence to Medicare’s key principles of universality; comprehensiveness; portability; accessibility; and, public administration. Medicare is a decentralized health care system, managed independently by Canada’s 10 provincial and three territorial governments, allowing for regional adaptations to fit varying degrees of urbanity, remoteness and needs. The Act is silent on its relationship to the Indigenous health care system – what some have described as Canada’s 14th health care system. The CHA has not kept pace with Indigenous self-government activities that have since spread across Canada. It has unfortunately crystallized the federal/provincial/territorial/Indigenous jurisdictional fragmentation that perpetuates health inequities and has failed to clarify these jurisdictions’ obligations towards Indigenous peoples. As a result of these omissions, access to health services remains a concern for many Indigenous Canadians, resulting in poorer outcomes and premature mortality. In this paper, I argue that Medicare renewal must: make an explicit commitment to Indigenous health equity; clarify jurisdictional obligations; establish effective mechanisms for addressing areas of jurisdictional dispute and/or confusion; and explicitly recognize First Nations and Inuit health care services as integral yet distinct systems, that nevertheless must be welcomed to seamlessly work with provincial health care systems to ensure continuity of care.

There is an international call for countries to ensure universal health coverage. This call has been embraced in South Africa (SA) in the form of a National Health Insurance (NHI). This is expected to be financed through general tax revenue with the possibility of additional earmarked taxes including a surcharge on personal income and/or a payroll tax for employers. Currently, health services are financed in SA through allocations from general tax revenue, direct out-of-pocket payments, and contributions to medical scheme. This paper uses the most recent data set to assess the progressivity of each health financing mechanism and overall financing system in SA. Applying standard and innovative methodologies for assessing progressivity, the study finds that general taxes and medical scheme contributions remain progressive, and direct out-of-pocket payments and indirect taxes are regressive. However, private health insurance contributions, across only the insured, are regressive. The policy implications of these findings are discussed in the context of the NHI.

Roma in central Europe face many violations of their rights, including those that impede their access to high-quality health care. Legal frameworks have the potential to address these violations, whereas legal advocacy services offer a means for enforcement of rights. We undertook key informant interviews with Roma civil society organisations and selected knowledgeable individuals in Macedonia, Romania and Serbia to identify lessons from the development of these services. Achievements were reported in four areas. Legal empowerment, with employment of Roma paralegals was especially effective, increasing awareness of the ability to challenge violations. Documentation of human rights violations is an important basis for advocacy, but does not guarantee redress, and may work best in combination with legal empowerment or international pressure. Strategic litigation can play a key role in removing bureaucratic obstacles that prevent Roma from exercising their right to access to health care. Progress in changing the narrative on Roma in the mainstream media has been limited but examples of good practice exist. Although much remains to be done, Roma groups report that legal advocacy has strengthened their ability to challenge rights violations, thereby enhancing their ability to access effective and responsive care.

There are now 125 million people aged 80 years and over worldwide, projected by the United Nations to grow threefold by 2050. While increases in life expectancy and rapid increases in the older-age population are considered positive developments, the consequential future health care burden represents a leading concern for health services. We revisit Williams’ ‘fair innings’ argument from 1997, in light of technological and demographic changes, and challenge the notion that greater longevity may impose an unfair burden on younger generations. We discuss perspectives on the equity-efficiency trade-off in terms of their implications for the growing over-80 population, as well as society in general. This includes questioning the comparison of treatment cost-effectiveness in younger vs. older populations when using quality-adjusted life years and the transience of life expectancies over generations. While recognising that there will never be a clear consensus regarding societal value judgements, we present empirical evidence on the very elderly that lends support to a stronger anti-ageist stance given current increases in longevity.

Canada is the only country with a broad public health system that does not include universal, nationwide coverage for pharmaceuticals. This omission causes real hardship to those Canadians who are not well-served by the existing patchwork of limited provincial plans and private insurance. It also represents significant forgone benefits in terms of governments’ ability to negotiate drug prices, make expensive new drugs available to patients on an equitable basis, and provide integrated health services regardless of therapy type or location. This paper examines Canada’s historical failure to adopt universal pharmaceutical insurance on a national basis, with particular emphasis on the role of public and elite ideas about its supposed lack of affordability. This legacy provides novel lessons about the barriers to reform and potential methods for overcoming them. The paper argues that reform is most likely to be successful if it explicitly addresses entrenched ideas about pharmacare’s affordability and its place in the health system. Reform is also more likely to achieve universal coverage if it is radical, addressing various components of an effective pharmaceutical program simultaneously. In this case, an incremental approach is likely to fail because it will not allow governments to contain costs and realize the social benefits that come along with a universal program, and because it means forgoing the current promising conditions for achieving real change.