Analysis of changes in the association of income and the utilization of curative health services in Mexico between 2000 and 2006

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A common characteristic of health systems in most developing countries is unequal access to health services. As a result, members of the poorest population groups often do not receive formal attention for health services, because they cannot afford it. In 2001 in Mexico, to address income-related differences in the use of health services, the government launched a major healthcare reform, which includes a health insurance program called <it>Seguro Popular</it>, aimed at improving healthcare access among poor, uninsured residents. This paper analyzes the before and after changes in the demand for curative ambulatory health services focusing on the association of income-related characteristics and the utilization of formal healthcare providers vs. no healthcare service utilization.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>By using two nationally representative health surveys (ENSA-2000 and ENSANUT-2006), we modeled an individual's decision when experiencing an illness to use services provided by the (1) Ministry of Health (MoH), (2) social security, (3) private entities, or (4) to not use formal services (no healthcare service utilization).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Poorer individuals were more likely in 2006 than in 2000 to respond to an illness by using formal healthcare providers. Trends in provider selection differed, however. The probability of using public services from the MoH increased among the poorest population, while the findings indicated an increase in utilization of private health services among members of low- and middle-income groups. No significant change was seen among formal workers -covered by social security services-, regardless of socioeconomic status.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Overall, for 2006 the Mexican population appears less differentiated in using healthcare across economic groups than in 2000. This may be related, in part, to the implementation of <it>Seguro Popular</it>, which seems to be stimulating healthcare demand among the poorest and previously uninsured segment of the population. Still, public health authorities need to address the remaining income-related healthcare utilization differences, the differences in quality between public and private health services, and the general perception that MoH facilities offer inferior services.</p

Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: The use of telemedicine is growing, but its efficacy for achieving comparable or improved clinical outcomes has not been established in many medical specialties. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of telemedicine interventions for health outcomes in two classes of application: home-based and office/hospital-based. METHODS: Data sources for the study included deports of studies from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and HealthSTAR databases; searching of bibliographies of review and other articles; and consultation of printed resources as well as investigators in the field. We included studies that were relevant to at least one of the two classes of telemedicine and addressed the assessment of efficacy for clinical outcomes with data of reported results. We excluded studies where the service did not historically require face-to-face encounters (e.g., radiology or pathology diagnosis). All included articles were abstracted and graded for quality and direction of the evidence. RESULTS: A total of 25 articles met inclusion criteria and were assessed. The strongest evidence for the efficacy of telemedicine in clinical outcomes comes from home-based telemedicine in the areas of chronic disease management, hypertension, and AIDS. The value of home glucose monitoring in diabetes mellitus is conflicting. There is also reasonable evidence that telemedicine is comparable to face-to-face care in emergency medicine and is beneficial in surgical and neonatal intensive care units as well as patient transfer in neurosurgery. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the widespread use of telemedicine in virtually all major areas of health care, evidence concerning the benefits of its use exists in only a small number of them. Further randomized controlled trials must be done to determine where its use is most effective