首页> 外文期刊>Health policy >Health insurance reforms in Singapore and Hong Kong: How the two ageing asian tigers respond to health financing challenges?
【24h】

Health insurance reforms in Singapore and Hong Kong: How the two ageing asian tigers respond to health financing challenges?

机译:新加坡和香港的健康保险改革:两位老化亚洲老虎如何应对健康融资挑战?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Singapore and Hong Kong, two high-income "Tiger economies" in Asia, were ranked as the top two most efficient health systems in the world. Despite remarkable similarities in history and socioeconomic development, both economies embraced rather different paths in health care reforms in the past decades, which reflect their respective sociopolitical dynamics. Rapidly ageing populations and the anxiety about future funding of health care have prompted them to embark on major health financing reforms in the recent three years. While Singapore has transitioned to universal health coverage with the implementation of MediShield Life (MSL), Hong Kong is about to introduce the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme (VHIS) to supplement its health care financing. Based on secondary materials including policy documents, press releases, and anecdotal reports, this essay compares these two recent reforms on their political context, drivers of reforms, and policy contents, and assesses their prospects in terms of coverage, financial protection, and major implementation challenges. The preliminary assessment suggests that while both programs are associated with certain drawbacks, those of the VHIS may be more fatal and warrant close attention. This essay concludes with a central caveat that underscores the pivotal role of the state in managing health care reforms. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:新加坡和香港,亚洲两家高收入的“老虎经济”被排名为世界上两大最有效的卫生系统。尽管在历史和社会经济发展中具有显着的相似之处,但在过去的几十年中,两国经济都会在卫生经济改革中受到相当不同的道路,这反映了各自的社会政治动态。迅速老化的人口和对未来卫生保健资金的焦虑促使他们在近三年内踏上了主要的健康融资改革。虽然新加坡随着Medishiff Life(MSL)的实施而过渡到普遍的健康覆盖范围,但香港即将介绍自愿健康保险计划(VHIs),以补充其医疗保健融资。基于副资料,包括政策文件,新闻稿和轶事报告,这篇论文将最近的两项关于其政治背景,改革驱动程序以及政策内容的改革进行了比较,并在覆盖范围,金融保护和重大实施方面评估其前景挑战。初步评估表明,虽然两个程序都与某些缺点相关联,但VHI的那些可能会更加致命和谨慎关注。本文与中央警告结束,强调了国家管理医疗改革方面的关键作用。 (c)2018 Elsevier B.v.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号