Global Health Watch 1 in one file
Global Health Watch 1 in one file Global Health Watch 1 in one file
Health care systems | B1 • And sixth, it adopts a strong human rights perspective on health by affirming the fundamental human right to health and the responsibility of governments to formulate the required policies, strategies and plans of action. Significantly, the Alma Ata Declaration also placed the challenge of ‘Health for All’ within a global and political context by calling for peace, reduced military expenditure and a ‘New International Economic Order’ to reduce the health status gap between developing and developed countries. Since 1978, however, the term ‘PHC Approach’ has been frequently misunderstood and confused with the ‘primary level’ of the health care system. It is also often wrongly associated with cheap, low-technology care supposedly best suited to developing countries. In fact, the PHC Approach refers to a set of concepts and principles that are as relevant and applicable to a university teaching hospital as to a rural clinic; to a poor African country as to an industrialized European country; and to a highly specialized doctor as much as to a community-based lay health worker. In the years immediately after Alma Ata, the District Health System (DHS) model was formulated as an organizational framework for a health care system to deliver the PHC Approach. For many health care practitioners, the PHC Approach and DHS model formed the conceptual and organizational pillars respectively for the attainment of Health for All. The DHS model (WHO 1988; WHO 1992) consists of: • a health care system organized on the basis of clearly demarcated geographical areas (known as ‘health districts’), ideally corresponding to an administrative area of government. • the health district as the basis for the seamless integration of communitybased, primary level and Level 1 hospital services. Level 1 hospitals were considered a vital hub in which to locate medical expertise, pharmaceutical supply systems, and transport to support a network of clinics and community-based health care. • health districts sharing the same administrative boundaries as other key sectors (such as water, education and agriculture). • a district-level health management team with the authority and capacity to manage the comprehensive and integrated mix of community-based, clinic and Level 1 hospital services; to facilitate effective multi-sectoral action on health; and to work with local private and non-government providers. Guidance was provided on the size of ‘health districts’ based on a balance between being small enough to facilitate community involvement and contextspecific health planning, but large enough to justify investment in a decen- 58
tralized management structure. Central and intermediate-level policy makers and managers would ensure national coherence and coordination, common standards and equitable resource distribution amongst districts. 2 The demise of health for all Macro-economic factors Health care systems require the availability of basic physical and human infrastructure throughout a country if they are to be effective and equitable. Countries need to invest in the development of this infrastructure, but many have no resources to do so. Low- and lower middle-income countries need to spend at least US$30–40 (2002 prices) each year per person if they are to provide their populations with ‘essential’ health care (Commission on Macroeconomics and Health 2001). This sum is about three times the current average spending on health in the least developed countries and more than current spending in other lowincome and lower middle-income countries. More to the point, it is over five times the average government health spending of the least developed countries and about three times that of other low-income countries. Estimates of this kind are fraught with methodological limitations and assumptions, but they indicate the size of the resource gap facing most developing countries. The causes of impoverished health care systems are varied. Many countries with low levels of health care expenditure are in fact able to invest much more than they do. However, many macro-economic factors (discussed in part A) that help to keep poor countries poor, by extension, keep levels of health care expenditure low. Historically, a key macro-economic event was the hikes in oil prices during 1979–1981, which precipitated an economic recession in industrialized countries, prompting governments in those countries to raise interest rates. The combination of recession in the industrialized world, higher oil prices and raised interest rates precipitated a macro-economic crisis in many developing countries, especially in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa. These countries experienced reduced export demand, declines in primary commodity (non-fuel) prices, deteriorating real terms of trade, lower capital inflows and soaring debt service payments. Many countries had negative economic growth, reduced government revenue and increasing poverty. The effects on health care systems, so soon after the bold and visionary aspirations of the Alma Ata Declaration, were nothing short of disastrous. Most health care systems have never had a chance to recover from these effects which included: Approaches to health care 59
- Page 25 and 26: impacting on health. The Watch hope
- Page 27: part a | Health and globalization T
- Page 30 and 31: Health and globalization | A1 and h
- Page 32 and 33: Health and globalization | A1 in 20
- Page 34 and 35: Health and globalization | A1 is gl
- Page 36 and 37: Health and globalization | A1 peopl
- Page 38 and 39: Health and globalization | A1 numbe
- Page 40 and 41: Health and globalization | A1 and p
- Page 42 and 43: Health and globalization | A1 econo
- Page 44 and 45: Health and globalization | A1 Box A
- Page 46 and 47: Health and globalization | A1 half
- Page 48 and 49: Health and globalization | A1 appro
- Page 50 and 51: table a1 Key health concerns with W
- Page 52 and 53: Health and globalization | A1 Healt
- Page 54 and 55: Health and globalization | A1 merci
- Page 56 and 57: Health and globalization | A1 thems
- Page 58 and 59: Health and globalization | A1 Even
- Page 60 and 61: Health and globalization | A1 • A
- Page 62 and 63: Health and globalization | A1 non-v
- Page 64 and 65: Health and globalization | A1 27-28
- Page 66 and 67: Health and globalization | A1 Jenki
- Page 68 and 69: Health and globalization | A1 Satte
- Page 70 and 71: Health and globalization | A1 WHO (
- Page 72 and 73: and regulatory authorities mandated
- Page 74 and 75: Health care systems | B1 4) selecti
- Page 78 and 79: Health care systems | B1 • declin
- Page 80 and 81: Health care systems | B1 user charg
- Page 82 and 83: Health care systems | B1 focus on t
- Page 84 and 85: Health care systems | B1 for health
- Page 86 and 87: Health care systems | B1 their cont
- Page 88 and 89: Health care systems | B1 health car
- Page 90 and 91: Health care systems | B1 ing servic
- Page 92 and 93: Health care systems | B1 Box B1.7 G
- Page 94 and 95: Health care systems | B1 many of th
- Page 96 and 97: Health care systems | B1 the lack o
- Page 98 and 99: Macro-economic factors Impoverished
- Page 100 and 101: Health care systems | B1 HALE 2000
- Page 102 and 103: Health care systems | B1 But improv
- Page 104 and 105: Health care systems | B1 high-incom
- Page 106 and 107: Health care systems | B1 Structural
- Page 108 and 109: Health care systems | B1 the high t
- Page 110 and 111: Health care systems | B1 and histor
- Page 112 and 113: Health care systems | B1 norms (Loe
- Page 114 and 115: Health care systems | B1 Foster M,
- Page 116 and 117: Health care systems | B1 Toole M et
- Page 118 and 119: B2 | Medicines Introduction Essenti
- Page 120 and 121: Health care systems | B2 of new med
- Page 122 and 123: Health care systems | B2 chapter re
- Page 124 and 125: Health care systems | B2 the fourth
<strong>Health</strong> care systems | B1<br />
• And sixth, it adopts a strong human rights perspective on health by affirm<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the fundamental human right to health and the responsibility of governments<br />
to formulate the required policies, strategies and plans of action.<br />
Significantly, the Alma Ata Declaration also placed the challenge of ‘<strong>Health</strong><br />
for All’ with<strong>in</strong> a global and political context by call<strong>in</strong>g for peace, reduced<br />
military expenditure and a ‘New International Economic Order’ to reduce the<br />
health status gap between develop<strong>in</strong>g and developed countries.<br />
S<strong>in</strong>ce 1978, however, the term ‘PHC Approach’ has been frequently misunderstood<br />
and confused with the ‘primary level’ of the health care system. It<br />
is also often wrongly associated with cheap, low-technology care supposedly<br />
best suited to develop<strong>in</strong>g countries. In fact, the PHC Approach refers to a set<br />
of concepts and pr<strong>in</strong>ciples that are as relevant and applicable to a university<br />
teach<strong>in</strong>g hospital as to a rural cl<strong>in</strong>ic; to a poor African country as to an <strong>in</strong>dustrialized<br />
European country; and to a highly specialized doctor as much as to a<br />
community-based lay health worker.<br />
In the years immediately after Alma Ata, the District <strong>Health</strong> System (DHS)<br />
model was formulated as an organizational framework for a health care system<br />
to deliver the PHC Approach. For many health care practiti<strong>one</strong>rs, the PHC<br />
Approach and DHS model formed the conceptual and organizational pillars<br />
respectively for the atta<strong>in</strong>ment of <strong>Health</strong> for All. The DHS model (WHO 1988;<br />
WHO 1992) consists of:<br />
• a health care system organized on the basis of clearly demarcated geographical<br />
areas (known as ‘health districts’), ideally correspond<strong>in</strong>g to an<br />
adm<strong>in</strong>istrative area of government.<br />
• the health district as the basis for the seamless <strong>in</strong>tegration of communitybased,<br />
primary level and Level 1 hospital services. Level 1 hospitals were<br />
considered a vital hub <strong>in</strong> which to locate medical expertise, pharmaceutical<br />
supply systems, and transport to support a network of cl<strong>in</strong>ics and community-based<br />
health care.<br />
• health districts shar<strong>in</strong>g the same adm<strong>in</strong>istrative boundaries as other key<br />
sectors (such as water, education and agriculture).<br />
• a district-level health management team with the authority and capacity to<br />
manage the comprehensive and <strong>in</strong>tegrated mix of community-based, cl<strong>in</strong>ic<br />
and Level 1 hospital services; to facilitate effective multi-sectoral action on<br />
health; and to work with local private and non-government providers.<br />
Guidance was provided on the size of ‘health districts’ based on a balance<br />
between be<strong>in</strong>g small enough to facilitate community <strong>in</strong>volvement and contextspecific<br />
health plann<strong>in</strong>g, but large enough to justify <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong> a decen-<br />
58