Search

Health disparities, also known as health inequities, are systematic and potentially remediable differences in one or more aspects of health across population groups defined socially, economically, demographically, or geographically (). This topic has been the subject of research stretching back at least decades. Reports and studies have delved into how inequities develop in different societies and, with particular regard to health services, in access to and financing of health systems. In this review, we consider empirical studies from the United States and elsewhere, and we focus on how one aspect of health systems, clinical care, contributes to maintaining systematic differences in health across population groups characterized by social disadvantage. We consider inequities in clinical care and the policies that influence them. We develop a framework for considering the structural and behavioral components of clinical care and review the existing literature for evidence that is likely to be generalizable across health systems over time. Starting with the assumption that health services, as one aspect of social services, ought to enhance equity in health care, we conclude with a discussion of threats to that role and what might be done about them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Primary care in western Europe is delivered by general practitioners (GPs) but their role within the overall health system is poorly understood. The aim of this article is to present an overview of the characteristics of general practice in the context of health systems and to describe their variability and interrelationships. Data were obtained from two main sources: publications of official organizations and EC research projects. The characteristics of general practice are described and analysed with regard to three features: mode of payment, gatekeeper function and practice organization and workload. Despite their focus on general practice as the cornerstone of the health system, western European countries differ considerably in the major characteristics of primary care. There is variability in the ratio of GPs to population and in the extent to which patients relate to individual physicians. Although all countries have universal health insurance, the mode of payment of GPs differs. In some countries, the gatekeeper function of general practice is more highly developed and the use of specialist services varies accordingly. Practice characteristics such as workload, length of consultation, ordering of tests and reappointments also vary with differences in payment and gatekeeping arrangements. In particular, fee-for-service was associated with weaker physician-patient relationships, reduced attractiveness of general practice, more home visiting and longer consultations. Strong gatekeeping arrangements are not incompatible with high public satisfaction and are associated with lower visit rates. However, strong gatekeeping is not characteristic of fee-for-service arrangements. These findings suggest a need for more concerted research that could inform policy decisions concerning primary care in the USA as well as in Europe.

Objective: The quantifying, by subject area, of research published in scientific journals on primary health care, in five different cultural/geographic areas., Design: Descriptive study., Setting: Scientific journals on primary health care., Participants: Original articles published in 1991 in the following journals on primary health care (general practice): Atención Primaria, Canadian Family Physician, Family Practice, Journal of Family Practice and Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care., Interventions and Main Results: The classification adopted here was that used in the research into primary health care by the Canadian Association of Family Physicians. The five journals between them published 263 original articles. Articles on organisation and provision of health services constituted 42% of the total; next in frequency were articles on epidemiology (18%) and on psychosocial concerns. Methodological studies and research into training and professional kills represent a scarce 6% and 8% respectively., Conclusions: The most commonly occurring subject in primary health care research is research on services. In the future it would be desirable to develop other areas (the clinical and psycho-social areas, methodology, and training).

Despite limited program evaluations of Medicaid accountable care organizations (ACOs), no studies have examined if cost-saving goals negatively affect quality of life and health care experiences of low-income enrollees. The Hennepin Health ACO uses an integrated care model to address the physical, behavioral, and social needs of Medicaid expansion enrollees. As part of a larger evaluation, we conducted semistructured interviews with 35 primary care using Hennepin Health members enrolled for 2 or more years. Using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis, we assessed enrollee complexity and use of the care model and improvements in quality of life. We found improved quality of life was consistently associated with strong bonds to primary care, consistent mental health care, and support from extended care team members. Comprehensive, integrated care models within ACOs may improve quality of life for low-income Medicaid enrollees through coordinated primary and mental health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Among academic institutions in the United States, interest in global health has grown substantially: by the number of students seeking global health opportunities at all stages of training, and by the increase in institutional partnerships and newly established centers, institutes, and initiatives to house global health programs at undergraduate, public health and medical schools. Witnessing this remarkable growth should compel health educators to question whether the training and guidance that we provide to students today is appropriate, and whether it will be applicable in the next decade and beyond. Given that "global health" did not exist as an academic discipline in the United States 20 years ago, what can we expect it will look like 20 years from now and how can we prepare for that future?. Discussion: Most clinicians and trainees today recognize the importance of true partnership and capacity building in both directions for successful international collaborations. The challenge is in the execution of these practices. There are projects around the world where this is occurring and equitable partnerships have been established. Based on our experience and observations of the current landscape of academic global health, we share a perspective on principles of engagement, highlighting instances where partnerships have thrived, and examples of where we, as a global community, have fallen short. Conclusions: As the world moves beyond the charity model of global health (and its colonial roots), it is evident that the issue underlying ethical global health practice is partnership and the pursuit of health equity. Thus, achieving equity in global health education and practice ought to be central to our mission as educators and advisors when preparing trainees for careers in this field. Seeking to eliminate health inequities wherever they are ingrained will reveal the injustices around the globe and in our own cities and towns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article revisits Thomas McKeown's classic 1957 article regarding the difficulties involved in teaching, and preparing a syllabus in, social medicine. The present article assesses McKeown's perspective for the teacher designing a syllabus in social medicine for contemporary medical learners in the U.S. The three principal goals that McKeown identifies for such a syllabus--coherence, realizable learning objectives, and accessible presentation-- remain just as important and perhaps just as elusive today. The article surveys some of the difficulties involved in positioning social medicine themes and content within dominant conventions in U.S. medical curricula. The article focuses especially on difficulties posed by a wide and interdisciplinary evidence base, the perceived irrelevance of priorities and interventions important in virtually any informed concept of social medicine, and how these priorities and interventions can be presented within the framework expected by and familiar to medical learners in the U.S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]