Preparation Conduct Research In The Capella Library ✓ Solved
Preparation conduct research in the Capella Library and the Internet to
Conduct research in the Capella Library and the Internet to identify a country that you feel employs effective practices to deal with the health care issue you chose in the Unit 3 assignment. (This country will be henceforth referred to as the model country.) Be sure that the model country is from a different economic stratum than the country you chose in Unit 3.
Compare your chosen country from the Unit 3 assignment with the model country you identified during the preparation for this assignment. In your paper: Discuss your reasons for selecting the model country for its best practices. Assess the performance indicators that led to the selection. Compare briefly the challenges each government faces when addressing the issue.
Compare briefly the approaches each government takes to address the issue. What might be reasons for the differences? Choose one approach employed by your model country as a best practice to address the issue. Discuss ways that adoption of that best practice might improve health care services provided to customers in your chosen country.
Sample Paper For Above instruction
In the quest to improve healthcare systems globally, selecting effective practices from diverse nations enables a profound understanding of successful strategies. This paper compares two countries—one from a lower-income economic stratum, previously examined in Unit 3, and a higher-income model country known for its exemplary healthcare practices. It explores the reasons behind selecting the model country, analyzes their performance indicators and challenges, compares governmental approaches, and advocates for adopting a best practice to enhance healthcare delivery in the lower-income country.
Introduction
Global health disparities remain a significant concern, with countries at different economic levels facing unique challenges. In the previous assignment, the lower-income country grappled with limited healthcare access, inadequate infrastructure, and resource constraints. To understand how these issues are effectively addressed in higher-income settings, this paper examines Sweden as the model country due to its exemplary healthcare system, characterized by universal coverage, high performance indicators, and equitable access. Comparing Sweden with the prior selected lower-income country—Nairobi, Kenya—provides insights into the disparity in approaches and outcomes.
Reasons for Selecting the Model Country
Sweden was selected for its well-documented healthcare practices that demonstrate high efficiency, sustainability, and equity. Its health system is publicly financed, ensuring universal access and reducing disparities, which are common challenges in lower-income settings. The country's performance indicators, such as high life expectancy, low infant mortality rates, and substantial health outcomes, validate its effective strategies (World Health Organization, 2020). Additionally, Sweden's investment in primary care, preventive services, and health technology innovations make it an ideal model for comparative analysis.
Performance Indicators
Sweden's healthcare system consistently ranks highly globally based on several key performance indicators (KPIs). According to the World Health Organization (2020), Sweden exhibits a life expectancy of 82 years, infant mortality rate of 2.1 per 1,000 live births, and a high patient satisfaction rate. Healthcare expenditure as a percentage of GDP is stable at around 11%, reflecting sustainable investment. These indicators highlight the systemic effectiveness and public trust in health services, which contrast sharply with the lower-income country’s performance metrics.
Challenges Faced in Addressing Healthcare
While Sweden benefits from a robust healthcare infrastructure, it faces challenges such as an aging population increasing demand for chronic disease management, healthcare workforce shortages, particularly in rural areas, and rising healthcare costs. Policy adjustments continually aim to address these issues without compromising universal coverage (Lundström et al., 2019). Conversely, Kenya struggles with inadequate infrastructure, shortage of trained healthcare personnel, unequal access, and health disparities, compounded by economic limitations (Mwachande et al., 2021).
Government Approaches
Swedish healthcare employs a decentralized, tax-funded model emphasizing primary care, preventive services, and patient-centered approaches. The government regulates prices and quality standards, integrating health information technology to improve efficiency. In Kenya, the government relies heavily on external donors, community health workers, and segmented health financing, which creates fragmentation, inefficiencies, and access barriers (Okiro et al., 2020).
Reasons for Differences in Approaches
The fundamental differences in approaches are driven primarily by economic capacity, political systems, and historical contexts. Sweden’s tax-based financing allows for equitable resource allocation, whereas Kenya’s reliance on external funding reflects economic constraints and dependence on aid. Cultural factors and governance structures also influence policy priorities and implementation capabilities (Atun et al., 2015).
Adopting a Best Practice
One best practice from Sweden is its emphasis on integrated primary care and health information technology, which significantly improves service delivery and patient outcomes (Kelley et al., 2020). I advocate for Kenya to adopt integrated care models supported by digital health innovations to enhance access, coordination, and data-driven decision-making. Implementing electronic health records, telemedicine, and strengthening primary care facilities can bridge gaps and foster a patient-centered approach, ultimately improving population health metrics.
Conclusion
Comparing healthcare practices across different economic contexts offers valuable lessons. Sweden’s efficient, equitable system illustrates the benefits of a well-funded, coordinated approach, while Kenya’s challenges underscore the need for scalable, cost-effective strategies. By adopting integrated primary care practices and digital health tools, Kenya can advance towards universal health coverage, reduce disparities, and improve health outcomes. Global health cooperation, tailored policies, and investments in primary care infrastructure are essential for sustainable healthcare improvement.
References
- Atun, R., de Jong, J., & Htay, T. (2015). Transforming health systems for universal health coverage: A focus on primary health care. The Lancet, 386(10000), 557-565.
- Kelley, R. T., Williams, F. G., & Bryan, J. J. (2020). Implementing integrated primary care and health information systems in Sweden: Lessons for low-resource settings. Journal of Global Health Systems, 14(3), 45-58.
- Lundström, M., Liss, P., & Svensson, L. (2019). Challenges facing aging populations in Swedish healthcare: Policy responses and future directions. Aging & Society, 39(6), 1183-1197.
- Mwachande, K., Wanjohi, M., & Ochieng, V. (2021). Healthcare system challenges in Kenya: A review of infrastructure and workforce. African Journal of Health Policy and Research, 16(2), 120-128.
- Okiro, E. A., Wamae, C., & Ogola, B. (2020). Fragmentation of healthcare financing in Kenya: Implications for universal health coverage. BMJ Global Health, 5(10), e003218.
- World Health Organization. (2020). World health statistics 2020: Monitoring health for the SDGs. WHO Press.