Cost-sharing in the German health care system

In Germany, cost-sharing for health care has been used as a financing mechanism since 1923. In this article, the historical development of user charges in Germany since the 1980s is presented in more detail by type of private expenditure, including direct payments, cost-sharing measures, and voluntary health insurance. This is followed by a mapping of current cost-sharing measures including a discussion of protection mechanisms and responsibility for decision-making on cost-sharing measures and a summary of national policy debates. In the final section, the results of a systematic review of the literature on the impact of cost-sharing on equity, efficiency and health outcomes in Germany are presented. -- Die Selbstbeteiligung des Patienten an den Gesundheitsversorgungskosten hat in Deutschland eine lange Tradition und geht auf das Jahr 1923 zurück. In dieser Arbeit wird die historische Entwicklung und Bedeutung von Kostenselbstbeteiligung im Gesundheitswesen seit 1980 detailliert nach Art der Gesundheitsausgaben dargestellt. Dies beinhaltet direkte Zahlungen, Kostenbeteiligung, und private Krankenversicherung. Darauf folgt eine Darstellung der derzeitigen Regelungen zur Selbstbeteiligung mit Berücksichtigung der verschiedenen Mechanismen zum Schutz vor katastrophalen Gesundheitsausgaben und der Zuständigkeit für politische und administrative Entscheidungsfindungen zur Selbstbeteiligung. Im letzten Abschnitt werden die Ergebnisse einer systematischen Literatursuche zu den Auswirkungen von Kostenbeteiligungen auf Effizienz, Gerechtigkeit und Gesundheitsstatus in Deutschland dargestellt.

Facing the challenge of multimorbidity

Multimorbidity is a major public health challenge that is rising up the political and health agenda at an accelerated rate. Although the prevalence of multimorbidity increases with age, more than half of the population with multimorbidity are under the age of 65 years [1], with social deprivation a key determinant of multimorbidity in young and middle-aged adults [2,3].From an individual’s perspective, multimorbidity reduces life expectancy [4–6], decreases physical functioning and quality of life [7], and increases the risk of depression and other mental health disorders [3]. From a healthcare provider’s perspective, multimorbidity is associated with increased health service use, a high risk of emergency and other hospital admissions, high rates of polypharmacy, and spiralling costs [8]. Current health systems, which are typically built around a single-disease framework, are poorly adapted to cope with patients with multimorbidity, who typically experience fragmented healthcare services, leading to potentially inefficient and ineffective care.It is increasingly clear that we need to change our perspective on multimorbidity in order to address it as a specific condition that requires tailored solutions and approaches. The urgent need to tackle multimorbidity in a more strategic, holistic, and cost-effective manner was evident at the 18th European Health Forum Gastein, a leading annual health policy event in the European Union (EU), held in the autumn of 2015. This Forum attracted policymakers, clinicians, health service managers, patients, and a broad range of other stakeholders, all of whom were invited to attend a session entitled “Facing the Challenge of Multimorbidity”.Journal of Comorbidity 2016;6(1):1–

Health professional mobility in the WHO European Region and the WHO Global Code of Practice: data from the joint OECD/EUROSTAT/WHO-Europe questionnaire

WHO Member States adopted the Global Code of Practice on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel 10 years ago. This study assesses adherence with the Code’s principles and its continuing relevance in the WHO Europe region with regards to international recruitment of health workers. Data from the joint OECD/EUROSTAT/ WHO-Europe questionnaire from 2010 to 2018 are analyzed to determine trends in intra- and inter-regional mobility of foreign-trained doctors and nurses working in case study destination countries in Europe. In 2018, foreign-trained doctors and nurses comprised over a quarter of the physician workforce and 5% of the nursing workforce in five of eight and four of five case study countries, respectively. Since 2010, the proportion of foreign-trained nurses and doctors has risen faster than domestically trained professionals, with increased mobility driven by rising East-West and South-North intra-European migration, especially within the European Union. The number of nurses trained in developing countries but practising in case study countries declined by 26%. Although the number of doctors increased by 27%, this was driven by arrivals from countries experiencing conflict and volatility, suggesting countries generally are increasingly adhering to the Code’s principles on ethical recruitment. To support ethical recruitment practices and sustainable workforce development in the region, data collection and monitoring on health worker mobility should be improved

COVID-19 pandemic: health impact of staying at home, social distancing and 'lockdown' measures-a systematic review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: To systematically review the evidence published in systematic reviews (SR) on the health impact of staying at home, social distancing and lockdown measures. We followed a systematic review approach, in line with PRISMA guidelines. METHODS: In October 2020, we searched the databases Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Web of Science, using a pre-defined search strategy. RESULTS: The literature search yielded an initial list of 2172 records. After screening of titles and abstracts, followed by full-text screening, 51 articles were retained and included in the analysis. All of them referred to the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The direct health impact that was covered in the greatest number (25) of SR related to mental health, followed by 13 SR on healthcare delivery and 12 on infection control. The predominant areas of indirect health impacts covered by the included studies relate to the economic and social impacts. Only three articles mentioned the negative impact on education. CONCLUSIONS: The focus of SR so far has been uneven, with mental health receiving the most attention. The impact of measures to contain the spread of the virus can be direct and indirect, having both intended and unintended consequences. HIGHLIGHTS

Health in All Policies - Seizing opportunities, implementing policies

Health in All Policies (HiAP) is an approach to public policies across sectors that systematically takes into account the health and health-system implications of decisions, seeks synergies, and avoids harmful health impacts to improve population health and health equity. A HiAP approach is founded on health-related rights and obligations. It emphasizes the consequences of public policies on health determinants, aiming to improve the accountability of policy-makers for health impacts at all levels of policy-making. HiAP has great potential to improve population health and equity. But incorporating health into policies across sectors is often challenging and even when decisions are made, implementation may only be partial or unsustainable. This volume aims to improve our understanding of the dynamics of HiAP policy-making and implementation processes. Drawing on experience from all regions and from countries at various levels of economic development, it demonstrates that HiAP is feasible in different contexts, and provides fresh insight into how to seize opportunities to promote HiAP and how to implement policies for health across sectors. Part 1 sets the scene with five chapters on the concept and history of HiAP, links between socioeconomic development and health, the social determinants of health, and the importance of preserving national policy space for health in a globalizing world. Part 2 assesses progress in eight policy areas including early childhood development, work and health, mental health promotion, agriculture, food and nutrition, tobacco, alcohol, environment and development assistance. Part 3 draws together lessons for the health sector, as well as for politicians, policy-makers, researchers and civil society advocates.

A call for action to establish a research agenda for building a future health workforce in Europe

This Call for Action is closely linked to the European Public Health Association (EUPHA) and its new section ‘Health Workforce Research’. The idea was first developed during a pre-conference and two workshops at the EUPHA Conference in November 2016 in Vienna and further investigated at the EUPHA Conference in November 2017. We wish to thank all participants for inspiring discussions and for sharing ideas and knowledge.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Governing multisectoral action for health in low- and middle-income countries

Kumanan Rasanathan and colleagues argue that the potential of multisectoral collaboration for improving health remains untapped in many low- and middle-income countries