‘Mediocre’ NHS fails to make Europe’s top 10- 22nd out of 26
The NHS is ‘mediocre’, according to the Euro Health Consumer Index 2006 organisation behind an index ranking the UK’s public healthcare system 15th of 26 European countries. France was ranked top of the Euro Health Index 2006, which covers 28 performance indicators in five categories.
While the UK came top for patient information, Health Consumer Powerhouse said weak spots included MRSA infections in hospitals, waiting times for scheduled care, lack of right to a second opinion and high level of breast cancer mortality.
The conclusion was that the United Kingdom is a "Mediocre" overall performer. Good on heart problems. Star performer on healthcare information. The new Freedom of Information Act will hopefully improve score on openness indicators.
Content summary
France emerges as the 2006 winner of the Euro Health Consumer Index (EHCI), with a technically efficient and generously providing healthcare system. France scores 576 out of 750 maximum points. It is sometimes argued that “the French healthcare system has severe budget deficit problems”. The author would like to note that budget deficits in public sector areas, which are not financed for performance and work in a situation of competition, are more or less arbitrary! As long as “France, S.A.” is reasonably solvent, black or red figures in its healthcare system are not very significant.
The scoring has intentionally been done in such a way that the likelihood that two states should end up sharing a position in the ranking is almost zero. It must therefore be noted that France, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany and Luxembourg are really very difficult to separate, and that very subtle changes in single scores modify the internal order of these six top countries.
One interesting thing about the top six states is that they achieve their top positions in very different ways. Sweden reaches 4th place almost entirely because of a solid victory in the Outcomes quality discipline, and with very poor performance on Accessibility.
(Radically improving Medical Outcomes is a much more laborious and much longer process than reducing waiting times.) This means that if healthcare officials and politicians took to looking across borders, and “steal” good things from their EU neighbours, there is a good chance for a nation to come much closer to the theoretical top score of 750.
In southern Europe, Spain and Italy provide excellent healthcare services. Real excellence in southern European healthcare seems to be a bit too much dependent on the consumers’ ability to afford private healthcare as a supplement to public healthcare for these countries to reach top scores.
A mixed performance is shown by the UK, which wins out on healthcare information. The overall U.K. score is dragged down by waiting lists and uneven quality performance.
The full Euro Health Consumer Index 2006 pdf is available for your delicatation.
While the UK came top for patient information, Health Consumer Powerhouse said weak spots included MRSA infections in hospitals, waiting times for scheduled care, lack of right to a second opinion and high level of breast cancer mortality.
The conclusion was that the United Kingdom is a "Mediocre" overall performer. Good on heart problems. Star performer on healthcare information. The new Freedom of Information Act will hopefully improve score on openness indicators.
Content summary
France emerges as the 2006 winner of the Euro Health Consumer Index (EHCI), with a technically efficient and generously providing healthcare system. France scores 576 out of 750 maximum points. It is sometimes argued that “the French healthcare system has severe budget deficit problems”. The author would like to note that budget deficits in public sector areas, which are not financed for performance and work in a situation of competition, are more or less arbitrary! As long as “France, S.A.” is reasonably solvent, black or red figures in its healthcare system are not very significant.
The scoring has intentionally been done in such a way that the likelihood that two states should end up sharing a position in the ranking is almost zero. It must therefore be noted that France, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany and Luxembourg are really very difficult to separate, and that very subtle changes in single scores modify the internal order of these six top countries.
One interesting thing about the top six states is that they achieve their top positions in very different ways. Sweden reaches 4th place almost entirely because of a solid victory in the Outcomes quality discipline, and with very poor performance on Accessibility.
(Radically improving Medical Outcomes is a much more laborious and much longer process than reducing waiting times.) This means that if healthcare officials and politicians took to looking across borders, and “steal” good things from their EU neighbours, there is a good chance for a nation to come much closer to the theoretical top score of 750.
In southern Europe, Spain and Italy provide excellent healthcare services. Real excellence in southern European healthcare seems to be a bit too much dependent on the consumers’ ability to afford private healthcare as a supplement to public healthcare for these countries to reach top scores.
A mixed performance is shown by the UK, which wins out on healthcare information. The overall U.K. score is dragged down by waiting lists and uneven quality performance.
The full Euro Health Consumer Index 2006 pdf is available for your delicatation.
posted by Dr Search- Principal Consultant at the Search Clinic at
4:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home