Universal health coverage and the public health workforce

2014 ◽  
Vol 134 (5) ◽  
pp. 245-247 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James Pfeiffer ◽  
Rachel R. Chapman

AbstractIn many African countries, hundreds of health-related NGOs are fed by a chaotic tangle of donor funding streams. The case of Mozambique illustrates how this NGO model impedes Universal Health Coverage. In the 1990s, NGOs multiplied across post-war Mozambique: the country’s structural adjustment program constrained public and foreign aid expenditures on the public health system, while donors favored private contractors and NGOs. In the 2000s, funding for HIV/AIDS and other vertical aid from many donors increased dramatically. In 2004, the United States introduced PEPFAR in Mozambique at nearly 500 million USD per year, roughly equivalent to the entire budget of the Ministry of Health. To be sure, PEPFAR funding has helped thousands access antiretroviral treatment, but over 90% of resources flow “off-budget” to NGO “implementing partners,” with little left for the public health system. After a decade of this major donor funding to NGOs, public sector health system coverage had barely changed. In 2014, the workforce/ population ratio was still among the five worst in the world at 71/10000; the health facility/per capita ratio worsened since 2009 to only 1 per 16,795. Achieving UHC will require rejection of austerity constraints on public sector health systems, and rechanneling of aid to public systems building rather than to NGOs.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Oral health is a central element of general health with significant impact in terms of pain, suffering, impairment of function and reduced quality of life. Although most oral disease can be prevented by health promotion strategies and routine access to primary oral health care, the GBD study 2017 estimated that oral diseases affect over 3.5 billion people worldwide (Watt et al, 2019). Given the importance of oral health and its potential contribution to achieving universal health coverage (UHC), it has received increased attention in public health debates in recent years. However, little is known about the large variations across countries in terms of service delivery, coverage and financing of oral health. There is a lack of international comparison and understanding of who delivers oral health services, how much is devoted to oral health care and who funds the costs for which type of treatment (Eaton et al., 2019). Yet, these aspects are central for understanding the scope for improvement regarding financial protection against costs of dental care and equal access to services in each country. This workshop aims to present the comparative research on dental care coverage in Europe, North America and Australia led by the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. Three presentations will look at dental care coverage using different methods and approaches. They will compare how well the population is covered for dental care especially within Europe and North America considering the health systems design and expenditure level on dental care, using the WHO coverage cube as analytical framework. The first presentation shows results of a cross-country Health Systems in Transition (HiT) review on dental care. It provides a comparative review and analysis of financing, coverage and access in 31 European countries, describing the main trends also in the provision of dental care. The second presentation compares dental care coverage in eight jurisdictions (Australia (New South Wales), Canada (Alberta), England, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United States) with a particular focus on older adults. The third presentation uses a vignette approach to map the extent of coverage of dental services offered by statutory systems (social insurance, compulsory insurance, NHS) in selected countries in Europe and North America. This workshop provides the opportunity of a focussed discussion on coverage of dental care, which is often neglected in the discussion on access to health services and universal health coverage. The objectives of the workshop are to discuss the oral health systems in an international comparative setting and to draw lessons on best practices and coverage design. The World Conference on Public Health is hence a good opportunity for this workshop that contributes to frame the discussion on oral health systems in a global perspective. Key messages There is large degree of variation in the extent to which the costs of dental care are covered by the statutory systems worldwide with implications for oral health outcomes and financial protection. There is a need for a more systematic collection of oral health indicators to make analysis of reliable and comparable oral health data possible.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Perkiö ◽  
R Harrison ◽  
M Grivna ◽  
D Tao ◽  
C Evashwich

Abstract Education is a key to creating solidary among the professionals who advance public health’s interdisciplinary mission. Our assumption is that if all those who work in public health shared core knowledge and the skills for interdisciplinary interaction, collaboration across disciplines, venues, and countries would be facilitated. Evaluation of education is an essential element of pedagogy to ensure quality and consistency across boundaries, as articulated by the UNESCO education standards. Our study examined the evaluation studies done by programs that educate public health professionals. We searched the peer reviewed literature published in English between 2000-2017 pertaining to the education of the public health workforce at a degree-granting level. The 2442 articles found covered ten health professions disciplines and had lead authors representing all continents. Only 86 articles focused on evaluation. The majority of the papers examined either a single course, a discipline-specific curriculum or a teaching method. No consistent methodologies could be discerned. Methods ranged from sophisticated regression analyses and trends tracked over time to descriptions of focus groups and interviews of small samples. We found that evaluations were primarily discipline-specific, lacked rigorous methodology in many instances, and that relatively few examined competencies or career expectations. The public health workforce enjoys a diversity of disciplines but must be able to come together to share diverse knowledge and skills. Evaluation is critical to achieving a workforce that is well trained in the competencies pertinent to collaboration. This study informs the pedagogical challenges that must be confronted going forward, starting with a commitment to shared core competencies and to consistent and rigorous evaluation of the education related to training public health professionals. Key messages Rigorous evaluation is not sufficiently used to enhance the quality of public health education. More frequent use of rigorous evaluation in public health education would enhance the quality of public health workforce, and enable cross-disciplinary and international collaboration for solidarity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document