Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Week 11: Heathcare Financing and Health Outcomes in the Global Context
After considering the case study analysis, I really do think that cost effectiveness analysis is the way forward for deciding where resources should be allocated. There are only so many resources available and it makes most sense to use them in the most effective way possible. Though the discussion of this type of analysis brought up many criticisms, I do not think that there is a better way thus far for stakeholders and those providing the resources to analyze where their money would be best spent. It was interesting in class, that the point was brought up by Dr. Shahi that we don't have to worry about this type of thing in the US on the scale that developing nations do. We basically can have everything in regards to healthcare, if we wanted. But these other nations cannot, and until they are economically viable enough to reach a level where they can provide for all their healthcare needs, their needs to be some system that is effective at prioritizing what issues merit funding. I was curious about one of the articles 10 "best buys," the provision of insecticide treated bednets, because for some reason I was under the impression that there were more effective ways of addressing malaria in these regions, such as building up land on the swampy areas. I am not sure, maybe I just made this up. However, the discussion question that asked if the World Bank should require cost effectiveness analysis before they allocated funds seems to be an interesting one. I do not think that this can be the only measure they use when determing allocation of resources, however, I do think it should be incorporated and taken seriously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
hi sheila,
i agree with your perspective on cost effectiveness analysis. i've always wondered why no one thought this through sooner...maybe no one wants to be accountable for their ineffectiveness. it seems that agencies only want to be celebrated for their perceived successes. you are right-there are better ways to combat malaria. if agencies were made accoutable for their spending, land development may have happened years ago.
Hello Sheila,
Thank you for your thoughts on the case study Yaneth and I presented in week 11 of class. With regards to health care resources in the U.S., I would submit that although we have enough resources to meet our needs, there are a lot of disparities in access to these resources. So, to that end, I believe that there is a role for cost-effectiveness here in the U.S. because applying it can help level the playing field and reduce the disparities in access.
Thanks for referring back to our presentation. I do agree with Andrea. I understand that compared to developing countries, the United States has more financial resources available, and if people had the will we could do anything in this country. But even with this capability, we still live among disparities, like Andrea mentioned. After giving this presentation, I see how important it is to do this kind of analysis at all levels.
Post a Comment