Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
J Law Med Ethics ; 50(4): 726-737, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2281760

ABSTRACT

Vaccine apartheid is creating conditions that make for premature death, poverty, and disease in racialized ways. Invoking vaccine apartheid as opposed to euphemisms like vaccine nationalism, is necessary to highlight the racialized distributional consequences of vaccine inequities witnessed with COVID-19. This commentary clarifies the concept of vaccine apartheid against the historical and legal usage of apartheid. It reflects on the connections and important disjunctions between the two. It places the intellectual property regime under heightened scrutiny for reform and transformation. This commentary finds that drawing on the intersections between a human rights and health justice approach can provide creative and novel approaches for anti-subordination. It concludes that acknowledging and naming the structural injustice of vaccine apartheid is only the first step towards providing redress.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Apartheid , COVID-19/prevention & control , Fees and Charges , Poverty
5.
Health Policy ; 126(5): 398-407, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1540637

ABSTRACT

Provider payment mechanisms were adjusted in many countries in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Our objective was to review adjustments for hospitals and healthcare professionals across 20 countries. We developed an analytical framework distinguishing between payment adjustments compensating income loss and those covering extra costs related to COVID-19. Information was extracted from the Covid-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) and classified according to the framework. We found that income loss was not a problem in countries where professionals were paid by salary or capitation and hospitals received global budgets. In countries where payment was based on activity, income loss was compensated through budgets and higher fees. New FFS payments were introduced to incentivize remote services. Payments for COVID-19 related costs included new fees for out- and inpatient services but also new PD and DRG tariffs for hospitals. Budgets covered the costs of adjusting wards, creating new (ICU) beds, and hiring staff. We conclude that public payers assumed most of the COVID-19-related financial risk. In view of future pandemics policymakers should work to increase resilience of payment systems by: (1) having systems in place to rapidly adjust payment systems; (2) being aware of the economic incentives created by these adjustments such as cost-containment or increasing the number of patients or services, that can result in unintended consequences such as risk selection or overprovision of care; and (3) periodically evaluating the effects of payment adjustments on access and quality of care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Budgets , Fees and Charges , Humans , Motivation , Pandemics
9.
Br J Gen Pract ; 71(705): 155-156, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1181661
10.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 40(2): 343-348, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1063226

ABSTRACT

In 2019, as in prior years, Medicaid physician fees remained well below Medicare and private insurance fees despite growth in Medicaid enrollment. Low Medicaid physician fees have important implications in terms of access to care for Medicaid enrollees and the effects of proposals to expand coverage through a Medicaid buy-in program or a Medicaid-like public option.


Subject(s)
Medicaid , Physicians , Aged , Fees and Charges , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Medicare , Salaries and Fringe Benefits , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL