scholarly journals 生命倫理基礎的形成——從中國醫療衛生體制改革的歷史進程看

Author(s):  
Lin BIAN

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.在中國醫療衛生體制改革近30 年的風雨歷程中,由於前改革時期沒有條件形成公共生活的倫理精神,在醫療衛生體制改革的第一階段,即過渡期的10幾年中,同樣沒有能夠為改革確立合理的價值目標和形成強有力的道德基礎。在此後改革的推進期,政策制定和制度安排過程倫理基礎的缺失,是改革不成功的重要原因之一。中國社會在對改革的質疑和經驗教訓的反思中啟動的新一輪醫改,無論是政策制定還是框架設計,以及幾年來所取得的成就,都表明此一輪改革具備了較為自覺的生命倫理意識和公共生活倫理精神。中國醫療衛生體制改革的生命倫理基礎生成過程表明,生命倫理學研究在方法上應該堅持中國化的立場。Medical and healthcare reform in China over the past three decades has faced various challenges, one of which has been the lack of an ethical spirit in public life. The old moral foundation has collapsed and a new ethical system has not been established. It follows that neither the validity of reform nor public policies derived from that reform have a solid moral and ethical foundation. As the government seeks an effective way of reshaping the national healthcare system in terms of quality and accessibility to keep pace with rapid socio-political and economic transformation, it has to deal with various moral challenges. This essay provides a critical review of healthcare reform in past 30 years, with the shift away from a state-controlled, comprehensive healthcare system. While “fairness” is considered an ethical principle in a socialist systemlike China, it has always been a problem in reality given the huge disparity between wealthy cities and poverty-stricken countryside brought about by differences in economic situations and medical human resources. The reform has been welcomed by many, but it has also led to a decline in the scope and quality of healthcare services in certain regions. Hence, recent healthcare changes have focused primarily on grassroots medical networks, which aim to penetrate lower-tier and remote regions. However, the moral basis for these changes is ambiguous. The essay argues that it is crucial for Chinese scholars, healthcare professionals, and government administrators to think about the moral foundation upon which legal regulations and public policies can be implemented to meet specific needs in China.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 34 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diego Fornaciari ◽  
Arthur Vleugels ◽  
Stefaan Callens ◽  
Kristof Eeckloo

AbstractThe Belgian healthcare system consists of a complex of more or less autonomous groups of healthcare providers. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure that the fundamental right to qualitative healthcare is secured through the services they provide. In Belgium, the regulatory powers in healthcare are divided between the federal state and the three communities. Both levels, within their area of competence, monitor the quality of healthcare services. Unique to the Belgian healthcare system is that the government that providers are accountable to is not always the same as the government that is competent to set the criteria. The goal of this article is to provide an overview of the main mechanisms that are used by the federal government and the government of the Flemish community to monitor healthcare quality in hospitals. The Flemish community is Belgian’s largest community (6.2 million inhabitants). The overview is followed by a critical analysis of the dual system of quality monitoring.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-2

Quality management in healthcare can significantly and efficiently change the health system performance and patient satisfaction. It improves every aspect of the health system such as system or process, its functions, and goals, in a systematic evidence-based manner. A health system is anorganization of persons, institutions, and the resources which deliver health care services to fulfill health needs of the populations.1 A health system includes public sector facilities and private facilities, which deliver preventive, curative, and the personal health services. It also includes in it, theprograms which focus on behavior change, and vector-control program, financing methods like health insurance systems, inter-sectoral coordination, and legislation. The goals for the health system include; providing good health for its citizens, being responsive to the expectations of population it serves, and fair financing services. The achievements towards these goals is based on how effectively and efficiently, a health system carries out the following key functions including, provision of quality health care services, resource generation, financing, and overall stewardship.1 The outcome of the health system is not based on these factors only, in fact, it is based on multiple interrelated factors, which in turn are governed by the concepts, and principles of quality management in healthcare. There are many established quality standards that may work as a yardstick in a journey to achieve the goals of the healthcare system in a country. There are multiple key concepts in quality management of healthcare system such as healthcare services are very specific and unique, because of continuous physical and mental interaction of the patients and healthcare providers (HCP) in the process of health services provision, and patients usually have little knowledge of medical services. As in the input, process, and output model of a system, this interaction of the patient with HCP shall define the process and output of the system. So whether it is effective interaction or not will be the deciding the quality of healthcare and thus a satisfied patient at the end. Additionally, these interactions are not the only thing important in an effective treatment and quality of healthcare. The related factors which are also very pertinent to mention like payments type and sources, suppliers of the medical and non-medical equipment, materials and resources, healthcare financing in the form of insurance, legislative and other regulatory bodies, so emphasizing the complex nature of the healthcare quality management. Quality management principles are widely followed in a diverse range of systems and disciplines and the healthcare system is not an exception. The key principles of quality management in healthcare include; it should be patient-centered, all the stakeholders should have the say, including not only patients and HCPs, but paramedical staff, managers, political and financers. Leadership skills for quality, shared vision of care, process orientation by staff, partnership, third party services, continuous improvement, and use of modern technologies.2,3In the light of the concepts, principles, and standards, of the quality management system in the healthcare organizations brings a revolutionary change in the healthcare systems. Quality management affects every aspect of a health system from ownership to structure, and patient-doctor relationships so positively affect the goals of the health system and patient satisfaction. The health system comprises mainly private healthcare services to about seventy percent of patients and public healthcare services to remaining patients.4 Healthcare system in Pakistan is facing scarcity of financial resources, coupled with the double burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases. Although Pakistan has an adequate qualified human resources for healthcare service delivery, there are serious gaps in the planning, resulting in the poor quality of healthcare services. Still, the vast majority of the public and private hospitals in the country, are not certified with ISO 9001:2015, which specifically focuses on performance in a healthcare setting.5 Although international organizations like World Health Organization, continue to emphasize its importance for our health system, healthcare quality management is a neglected academic specialty in the country. Recently there has been an increasing emphasis seen on this relatively new concept of quality in healthcare, after more and more qualified people joining this discipline. The development of healthcare quality management mainly depends on the value and priority given by the leadership at all levels, to integrate and implement quality management with in the healthcare delivery system in a country. Although some progress has been made recently by Healthcare commissions in provinces there is a lack of a comprehensive national healthcare accreditation system and national guidelines, on healthcare quality and patient safety. Additionally, we still don,t have established national quality care indicators. In both private and public sector healthcare establishments, organizational culture is absent, and leadership, to prioritize quality management in healthcare. The ambiguity in the regulatory role of PMC (Former PM&DC), Healthcare commissions at federal and provincial levels was another hurdle at the legislative and policy level.6 It is suggested that healthcare policymakers and planners in the country start realizing the importance of quality management in healthcare and devise a system to integrate quality improvement initiatives at the planning stage of the healthcare system. This would make our health system efficient and thus maximum benefit could be gained from the resource-constrained healthcare system and would restore the much-needed patient trust in the healthcare system of our country.


Author(s):  
Karan Chawla ◽  
Angesom Kibreab ◽  
Victor & Scott ◽  
Edward L. Lee ◽  
Farshad Aduli ◽  
...  

Objective: It is unknown whether patients’ ratings of the quality of healthcare services they receive truly correlate with the quality of care from their providers. Understanding this association can potentiate improvement in healthcare delivery. We evaluated the association between patients’ ratings of the quality of healthcare services received and uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Subject and Methods: We used two iterations of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) of adults in the United States. HINTS 2007 (4,007 respondents; weighted population=75,397,128) evaluated whether respondents were up-to-date with CRC screening while HINTS 4 cycle 3 (1,562 respondents; weighted population=76,628,000) evaluated whether participants had ever received CRC screening in the past. All included respondents from both surveys were at least 50 years of age, had no history of CRC, and had rated the quality of healthcare services that they had received at their healthcare provider’s office in the previous 12 months. Results: HINTS 2007 data showed that respondents who rated their healthcare as good, or fair/poor were significantly less likely to be up to date with CRC screening compared to those who rated their healthcare as excellent. We found comparable results from analysis of HINTS 4 cycle 3 data with poorer uptake of CRC screening as the healthcare quality ratings of respondents’ reduced. Conclusion: Our study suggested that patients who reported receiving lower quality of healthcare services were less likely to have undergone and be compliant with CRC screening recommendations. It is important to pay close attention to patient feedback surveys in order to improve healthcare delivery.


2021 ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
Muhamad Iqbal Januadi Putra ◽  
Nabila Dety Novia Utami

The presence of healthcare facilities is quite essential to provide good healthcare services in a particular area, however, the existence of healthcare facilities is not evenly distributed in Cianjur Regency. This condition leads to the disparities of healthcare facilities across the Cianjur Regency. In this paper, we aim to measure and map the spatial disparities of healthcare facilities using a Two-Step Floating Catchment Analysis (2SFCA). This method can calculate the magnitude of spatial accessibility for healthcare facilities by formulating the travel time threshold and the quality of healthcare facilities across the study area. This research shows the result that the spatial accessibility of healthcare facilities in the Cianjur Regency is not evenly distributed across the districts. The spatial accessibility value resulted from 2SFCA is ranging from 0- 3.97. A low value indicates low spatial accessibility, while a higher value shows good accessibility. The majority of districts in the Cianjur Regency have the spatial accessibility value 0-0.5 (86%). Meanwhile, only a few have the higher value; value 0.5-0.99 as much as 6.6%, 0.99-1.49 as 3.3%, and 3.48-3.97 has a percentage of 3.3%. Also, this analysis results in the cluster of good spatial accessibility in healthcare facilities, namely the Pagelaran District and Cipanas District. Interestingly, the downtown of Cianjur Regency has lower spatial accessibility compared to both areas.


Author(s):  
Raffaele La Russa ◽  
Stefano Ferracuti

Clinical Risk Management aims to improve the performance quality of healthcare services through procedures that identify and prevent circumstances that could expose both the patient and the healthcare personnel to risk of an adverse event [...]


2016 ◽  
pp. 77-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Davuthan Günaydin ◽  
Hakan Cavlak ◽  
GamzeYıldız Şeren ◽  
Korhan Arun

One of the most important challenges faced by the healthcare system is the organization of healthcare services to cope with the increase in population and aging of citizens. Especially in developing countries, demographic movements of the population, regional disparities, political concerns, and increasing expectations of health services have led to a search for new ways to serve all of the population with healthcare services. With traditional methods, it is not possible to increase the supply of health services because of inadequate infrastructure and shortcomings in quantity and quality of healthcare staff. This new health system called e-health and uses all of the possibilities provided by information and communication technologies that aim to improve public health. In this chapter, the effects of e-health practices on the quality and accessibility of healthcare services are assessed and the extent of e-health practices in Turkey are evaluated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document