Search

Latin America continues to segregate different social groups into separate health-system segments, including two separate public sector blocks: a well resourced social security for salaried workers and their families and a Ministry of Health serving poor and vulnerable people with low standards of quality and needing a frequently impoverishing payment at point of service. This segregation shows Latin America's longstanding economic and social inequality, cemented by an economic framework that predicted that economic growth would lead to rapid formalisation of the economy. Today, the institutional setup that organises the social segregation in health care is perceived, despite improved life expectancy and other advances, as a barrier to fulfilling the right to health, embodied in the legislation of many Latin American countries. This Series paper outlines four phases in the history of Latin American countries that explain the roots of segmentation in health care and describe three paths taken by countries seeking to overcome it: unification of the funds used to finance both social security and Ministry of Health services (one public payer); free choice of provider or insurer; and expansion of services to poor people and the non-salaried population by making explicit the health-care benefits to which all citizens are entitled., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Although China's 2009 health-care reform has made impressive progress in expansion of insurance coverage, much work remains to improve its wasteful health-care delivery. Particularly, the Chinese health-care system faces substantial challenges in its transformation from a profit-driven public hospital-centred system to an integrated primary care-based delivery system that is cost effective and of better quality to respond to the changing population needs. An additional challenge is the government's latest strategy to promote private investment for hospitals. In this Review, we discuss how China's health-care system would perform if hospital privatisation combined with hospital-centred fragmented delivery were to prevail--population health outcomes would suffer; health-care expenditures would escalate, with patients bearing increasing costs; and a two-tiered system would emerge in which access and quality of care are decided by ability to pay. We then propose an alternative pathway that includes the reform of public hospitals to pursue the public interest and be more accountable, with public hospitals as the benchmarks against which private hospitals would have to compete, with performance-based purchasing, and with population-based capitation payment to catalyse coordinated care. Any decision to further expand the for-profit private hospital market should not be made without objective assessment of its effect on China's health-policy goals., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)