ABSTRACT
This study investigated the healthcare status of South Korea and member states of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). By employing the position value for relative comparison index, healthcare status was measured through the following components: demand, supply, accessibility, quality, and cost. Statistical analysis was conducted through the Mann-Kendall test from analyzing trends from 2000 onwards. Results showed that while Korea, on average, scores higher than the OECD average in most of the investigated components, it is below average in certain indexes including primary care and mental health care. Considering the various health issues that have been raised about these indexes, it is important these components be improved upon by policy-makers.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Health Policy , Korea , Mental Health , Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development , Primary Health CareABSTRACT
This study aims to evaluate the status of Korean healthcare among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries and to monitor the trend of health care status since 2000. The position value for relative comparison (PARC) index was selected to gauge the level of healthcare status in demand, supply, accessibility, quality, and cost as per healthcare policy aspects. The Mann-Kendall test was conducted to allocate healthcare status of Korea since 2000. The PARC values indicate strength and weakness of Korean healthcare system by the mathematical comparisons. Korea positioned higher in demand, supply, accessibility, and quality. Yet, there are shortages in human resources and primary care. In conclusion, we suggest utilizing this study provides evidence to prioritize health care problems that can lead to establishing healthcare policy.
Subject(s)
Humans , Decision Making , Delivery of Health Care , Health Policy , Health Priorities , Korea , Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development , Primary Health CareABSTRACT
Objective To assess the relative value of individual positions in the functional departments of a general hospital in Beijing,for reference of improving the salary allocation system and fine management of human resources.Methods The expert consultation method and International Position Evaluation system were used to quantitatively assess the tasks,work difficulty,size of responsibility and the qualifications required for every.Results A total of 38 experts contributed to this research which studied 140 positions including all functional departments of this hospital.The department having the most positions is the finance department(17)and the least is the Youth League committee(1).The position scoring the highest(805)was the director of medical affairs department;that scoring the lowest(263)was the food and beverage service positions of the diet and nutrition department.There was an evident turning point at score 547.Conclusions Functional departments′ position setting of this hospital proves reasonable,and the assessment scoring can reflect the value of the position in related dimensions.The result can be used as reference indexes for the hospital to perfect its human resource management system and improve the remuneration precision.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to investigate the current and trend of healthcare status of South Korea compared to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. We used the position value for relative comparison (PARC) method for measuring the healthcare status of South Korea by five parts of healthcare policy (demand, supply, accessibility, quality, and cost). Additionally, we conducted Mann-Kendall test for analyzing the trend of PARC from 2000 to the present. Demand, supply, accessibility, and quality of healthcare of Korea were located upon the average of OECD countries, and showed an increasing trend from 2000 to the present. However, primary care and screening for cervical cancer were placed at a lower level compared the OECD average. In conclusion, the current state of healthcare in Korea seems to be generally beyond the average among OECD countries. However, some parts, including primary care, need to be improved.