Web-economic-crisis-health-systems-and-health-web
Web-economic-crisis-health-systems-and-health-web Web-economic-crisis-health-systems-and-health-web
Serbia Vukasin Radulovic Economic trends • Serbia's real GDP per capita contracted in 2009 by 4.1%. The deficit as a share of GDP has increased every year between 2007 and 2011. • Unemployment has been high relative to the European mean and increased between 2008 and 2011. • Public expenditure on health as a share of total government expenditure has remained relatively stable since 2008. (Serbia: Figs 1 and 2). Policy responses Changes to public funding for the health system • The SHI budget fell by about 10% between 2008 and 2012. Changes to health coverage Population (entitlement) • Simplification of statutory coverage procedures for vulnerable groups (2010). • Statutory coverage made more accessible for children whose parents were not covered because of job loss (2012). The benefits package • Creation of a positive list for drugs, generating savings that enabled 300 new drugs and 40 new groups from the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification to be added (2010–2012). • Creation of a positive list for drugs (2010–2012). • Creation of a special fund for treatment of rare diseases (2012). • Decisions about allocating resources for rare diseases moved to an independent national committee (2012). User charges • Although it was widely discussed, user charges for services and prescriptions were not increased.
476 Economic crisis, health systems and health in Europe: country experience % Serbia: Fig. 1 Economic and fiscal indicators 2000–2007 and 2008–2011 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 −5 −10 −15 −20 −25 −30 _ _ _ _ ● ● _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ● _ ● ● _ _ _ _ ● ● _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ● ● ● _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ● ● _ _ _ ● _ ● _ ● _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ● ● ● ● ● _ _ _ _ _ Year 2000−2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ● ● ● ● ● _ _ _ _ _ Real GDP per capita growth Deficit/surplus (% GDP) Government spending (% GDP) Government health spending (% total government spending) Notes: Deficit/surplus: World Bank; Other indicators: WHO Health for All. 10−year bond rates Unemployment rate Serbia: Fig. 2 Trends in per capita spending on health, 2000–2011 Public spending per capita OOP spending per capita Non−OOP private spending per capita 600 Per capita spending $, PPP 400 200 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20 Growth % 0 −20 −40 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Public spending per capita growth OOP spending per capita growth Note: Spending calculated from WHO Health for All. Non−OOP private spending per capita growth
- Page 458 and 459: Latvia Uldis Mitenbergs and Maris T
- Page 460 and 461: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 462 and 463: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 464 and 465: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 466 and 467: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 468 and 469: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 470 and 471: Malta Natasha Azzopardi Muscat Econ
- Page 472 and 473: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 474 and 475: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 476 and 477: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 478 and 479: Montenegro Ratka Knežević Economi
- Page 480 and 481: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 482 and 483: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 484 and 485: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 486 and 487: Norway Anne Karin Lindahl and Jon M
- Page 488 and 489: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 490 and 491: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 492 and 493: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 494 and 495: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 496 and 497: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 498 and 499: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 500 and 501: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 502 and 503: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 504 and 505: The Russian Federation Elena Potapc
- Page 506 and 507: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 510 and 511: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 512 and 513: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 514 and 515: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 516 and 517: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 518 and 519: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 520 and 521: Spain Enrique Bernal-Delgado, Sandr
- Page 522 and 523: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 524 and 525: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 526 and 527: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 528 and 529: Switzerland Alberto Holly and Phili
- Page 530 and 531: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 532 and 533: Tajikistan Ghafur Khodjamurodov Eco
- Page 534 and 535: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 536 and 537: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 538 and 539: Ukraine Valeria Lekhan and Mariia T
- Page 540 and 541: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 542 and 543: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 544 and 545: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 546 and 547: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 548 and 549: Country profiles of health system r
- Page 550: Country profiles of health system r
Serbia<br />
Vukasin Radulovic<br />
Economic trends<br />
• Serbia's real GDP per capita contracted in 2009 by 4.1%. The deficit as a<br />
share of GDP has increased every year between 2007 <strong>and</strong> 2011.<br />
• Unemployment has been high relative to the European mean <strong>and</strong><br />
increased between 2008 <strong>and</strong> 2011.<br />
• Public expenditure on <strong>health</strong> as a share of total government expenditure<br />
has remained relatively stable since 2008. (Serbia: Figs 1 <strong>and</strong> 2).<br />
Policy responses<br />
Changes to public funding for the <strong>health</strong> system<br />
• The SHI budget fell by about 10% between 2008 <strong>and</strong> 2012.<br />
Changes to <strong>health</strong> coverage<br />
Population (entitlement)<br />
• Simplification of statutory coverage procedures for vulnerable groups (2010).<br />
• Statutory coverage made more accessible for children whose parents were<br />
not covered because of job loss (2012).<br />
The benefits package<br />
• Creation of a positive list for drugs, generating savings that enabled<br />
300 new drugs <strong>and</strong> 40 new groups from the Anatomical Therapeutic<br />
Chemical Classification to be added (2010–2012).<br />
• Creation of a positive list for drugs (2010–2012).<br />
• Creation of a special fund for treatment of rare diseases (2012).<br />
• Decisions about allocating resources for rare diseases moved to an<br />
independent national committee (2012).<br />
User charges<br />
• Although it was widely discussed, user charges for services <strong>and</strong><br />
prescriptions were not increased.