International Journal of Health Policy and Management

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Defining Pathways and Trade-offs Toward Universal Health Coverage; Comment on “Ethical Perspective: Five Unacceptable Trade-offs on the Path to Universal Health Coverage”

Document Type : Commentary

Author
Stéphane Verguet
Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
10.15171/ijhpm.2016.57
Abstract
The World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) World Health Report 2010, “Health systems financing, the path to universal coverage,” promoted universal health coverage (UHC) as an aspirational objective for country health systems. Yet, in addition to the dimensions of services and coverage, distribution of coverage in the population, and financial risk protection highlighted by the report, the consideration of the budget constraint should be further strengthened in the ensuing debate on resource allocation toward UHC. Beyond the substantial financial constraints faced by low- and middle-income countries, additional considerations, such as the geographical context, the underlying country infrastructure, and the architecture of health systems, determine the feasibility, effectiveness, quality and cost of healthcare delivery. Therefore, increased production and use of local evidence tied to the criteria of health benefits, equity, financial risk protection, and costs accompanying health delivery are needed so that to highlight pathways and acceptable trade-offs toward UHC.
Keywords
Universal Health Coverage (UHC)
Equity
Financial Risk Protection
Budget Constraint
Priority Setting
Subjects
  1. World Health Organization (WHO). World Health Report 2010. Health Systems Financing, the Path to Universal Coverage. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
  2. United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals. http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/. Accessed November 10, 2015.
  3. Norheim OF. Ethical perspective: five unacceptable trade-offs on the path to universal health coverage. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015;4(11):711-714.  doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.184
  4. Schmidt H, Gostin LO, Emanuel EJ. Public health, universal health coverage, and sustainable development goals: can they coexist? Lancet. 2015;386:928-930. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60244-6
  5. Hanratty B, Zhang T, Whitehead M. How close have universal health systems come to achieving equity in use of curative services? A systematic review. Int J Health Serv. 2007;37:89-109. doi:10.2190/ttx2-3572-ul81-62w7
  6. Sengupta A. Universal health coverage: beyond rhetoric. Occasional Paper No.20, November 2013. http://www.municipalservicesproject.org/publication/universal-health-coverage-beyond-rhetoric. Accessed May 8, 2016.
  7. World Health Organization (WHO). Making fair choices on the path to universal health coverage. Final report of the WHO Consultative Group on Equity and Universal Health Coverage. Geneva: WHO; 2014.
  8. Verguet S, Laxminarayan R, Jamison DT. Universal of public finance of tuberculosis treatment in India: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 2015;24:318-332. doi:10.1002/hec.3019
  9. Verguet S, Olson ZD, Babigumira JB, et al. Health gains and financial risk protection afforded by public financing of selected interventions in Ethiopia: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet Global Health. 2015;3(5):e288-e296. doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(14)70346-8

  • Received Date 13 March 2016
  • Revised Date 08 May 2016
  • Accepted Date 09 May 2016
  • First Published Date 01 July 2016
  • Published Date 01 July 2016