Module 4 Background: International And Comparative Health Po

Module 4 Backgroundinternational And Comparative Health Policyopp

Analyze international and comparative health policies by reviewing key literature and sources. The assignment involves understanding the role of comparative health studies, examining international health systems, and exploring lessons applicable to the United States. Key readings include Chan (2009), Saltman (2012), Schneider et al. (2017), Shi (2014), and the World Health Organization website. The goal is to critically evaluate different health policy frameworks, their outcomes, and their implications for policy learning and reform in the United States.

Paper For Above instruction

International and comparative health policies offer vital insights into how different countries structure, finance, and deliver healthcare. These lessons are particularly valuable for the United States, which faces persistent challenges related to healthcare access, cost, quality, and equity. This paper explores the role of comparative health studies, examines various health policy models worldwide, and discusses how these can inform reforms in the U.S. health system.

Understanding international health systems begins with recognizing that health policy is deeply embedded within a country’s socio-economic, political, and cultural context. Chan (2009) emphasizes that a comparative approach offers a lens through which policymakers can identify effective strategies and avoid pitfalls by analyzing different national models. For example, countries like the United Kingdom with their National Health Service (NHS) demonstrate how universal coverage can be achieved through centralized funding and management, leading to relatively equitable access and cost control. Conversely, countries with more market-oriented systems, such as the United States, face challenges related to fragmentation, high costs, and disparities in access.

Saltman (2012) highlights the importance of policy learning from international comparisons. His work indicates that by studying health systems across countries, policymakers can identify best practices and innovate solutions suited to their national contexts. An essential element in this learning process is recognizing the strengths and weaknesses inherent in different models, such as the trade-offs between efficiency, equity, and quality. For instance, social health insurance systems like Germany or the Netherlands may offer lessons in pooling resources and managing costs effectively, while maintaining quality of care.

Schneider et al. (2017) present findings from the "Mirror, Mirror" report that benchmark the U.S. health system against other industrialized nations. Their analysis reveals major flaws in U.S. healthcare, including higher costs and worse health outcomes compared to peer countries. The report advocates for adopting international best practices, such as emphasizing primary care, preventive services, and patient-centered approaches, to improve efficiency and equity. This comparative perspective underscores the need for systemic reforms that prioritize value-based care and reduce fragmentation.

Shi (2014) contextualizes international health policymaking by illustrating how different countries address core issues such as access, quality, and financing. The chapter emphasizes the importance of government roles in regulating and financing healthcare, as well as the need for transparency and accountability. For the U.S., adopting some international strategies—such as expanding coverage, emphasizing primary care, and implementing robust quality metrics—could potentially reduce disparities and improve overall outcomes.

The World Health Organization (WHO) provides additional resources and data illustrating global health system performance. Its reports reveal that countries with strong primary care foundations tend to have better health outcomes, lower costs, and higher patient satisfaction. The WHO’s focus on social determinants of health and universal health coverage underscores the importance of holistic, equity-focused policies that address social needs alongside medical care. For the U.S., integrating these insights could foster more inclusive and sustainable health systems.

In conclusion, international and comparative health policies serve as invaluable tools for the United States to evaluate its health system’s strengths and weaknesses. By examining models from across the globe, U.S. policymakers can identify opportunities to enhance efficiency, contain costs, and promote equity. Adopting a flexible, evidence-based approach—grounded in rigorous comparative analysis—can facilitate meaningful reform efforts. Ultimately, global experiences demonstrate that a coherent, inclusive, and well-funded health system benefits not only health outcomes but also societal well-being.

References

• Chan, K. (2009). Introduction to comparative health systems. Global Health Education System.
• Saltman, R. B. (2012). The role of comparative health studies for policy learning. Health Economics, Policy, and Law, 7(1), 11-13.
• Schneider, E. C., Sarnak, D. O., Squires, D., Shar, A., & Doty, M. M. (2017). Mirror, mirror 2017: International comparison reflects flaws and opportunities for better U.S. health care. Commonwealth Fund.
• Shi, L. (2014). International health policymaking. In Introduction to health policy (pp. 74-96). Chicago: Health Administration Press.
• World Health Organization. (n.d.). Global health Observatory data. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/data/gho
• World Health Organization. (2010). The World Health Report 2010: Health systems financing: The path to universal coverage.
• Reinhardt, U. E. (2012). The economics of health systems. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(2), 19–42.
• Bеnаbоn, J., & Hsiao, W. C. (2006). Universal coverage: Promise and performance in all but name. The Lancet, 368(9544), 944-950.
• Scanlon, W. J., & Farnham, M. (2010). The future of health policy and management. Health Affairs, 29(7), 1320-1323.
• OECD. (2017). Health at a Glance: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.