财政规则对美国和荷兰医疗保健政策的影响

H. C. Schakel, P. Jeurissen, S. Glied
{"title":"财政规则对美国和荷兰医疗保健政策的影响","authors":"H. C. Schakel, P. Jeurissen, S. Glied","doi":"10.1002/hpm.2382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Governments use fiscal rules to put a framework and limits on how budgetary challenges are addressed, but the rules themselves are still an understudied area among health policy scholars. For a long time, healthcare held a somewhat separate status because of the reliance on entitlements and dedicated revenue streams. However, the combined forces of advocates for integral decision-making, central budget control and the increasing costs might shift healthcare towards budgetary frameworks that currently apply to other spending categories. In this paper, we study fiscal rules that the US and the Netherlands have adopted since 2010 and their impact on healthcare policy. Our analysis shows that fiscal rules can have an impact on the rationing of healthcare. In the studied timeframe, the rules seem to have more impact on budget outcomes than on the budget process itself. In addition, the convergence of fiscal and program policy objectives seems to be better accomplished in a budgetary system that applies enforceable budget ceilings. Budgeting for health entitlements requires a comprehensive and tailor-made approach and the composition of traditional rules might not fully answer to the complexities of healthcare policy. This paper aims to contribute to that debate and the way we think about healthcare budgeting. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.","PeriodicalId":250539,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of health planning and management","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The influence of fiscal rules on healthcare policy in the United States and the Netherlands\",\"authors\":\"H. C. Schakel, P. Jeurissen, S. Glied\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hpm.2382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Governments use fiscal rules to put a framework and limits on how budgetary challenges are addressed, but the rules themselves are still an understudied area among health policy scholars. For a long time, healthcare held a somewhat separate status because of the reliance on entitlements and dedicated revenue streams. However, the combined forces of advocates for integral decision-making, central budget control and the increasing costs might shift healthcare towards budgetary frameworks that currently apply to other spending categories. In this paper, we study fiscal rules that the US and the Netherlands have adopted since 2010 and their impact on healthcare policy. Our analysis shows that fiscal rules can have an impact on the rationing of healthcare. In the studied timeframe, the rules seem to have more impact on budget outcomes than on the budget process itself. In addition, the convergence of fiscal and program policy objectives seems to be better accomplished in a budgetary system that applies enforceable budget ceilings. Budgeting for health entitlements requires a comprehensive and tailor-made approach and the composition of traditional rules might not fully answer to the complexities of healthcare policy. This paper aims to contribute to that debate and the way we think about healthcare budgeting. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.\",\"PeriodicalId\":250539,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International journal of health planning and management\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The International journal of health planning and management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2382\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of health planning and management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.2382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

政府利用财政规则为如何应对预算挑战制定框架和限制,但这些规则本身仍然是卫生政策学者研究不足的领域。长期以来,由于对权利和专用收入流的依赖,医疗保健在某种程度上保持着独立的地位。然而,倡导整体决策、中央预算控制和不断增加的成本的综合力量可能会使医疗保健转向目前适用于其他支出类别的预算框架。在本文中,我们研究了美国和荷兰自2010年以来采用的财政规则及其对医疗保健政策的影响。我们的分析表明,财政规则可能对医疗配给产生影响。在研究的时间框架内,这些规则对预算结果的影响似乎比对预算过程本身的影响更大。此外,在实行可执行预算上限的预算制度中,财政和项目政策目标的趋同似乎能得到更好的实现。保健权利预算需要一种全面和量身定制的方法,传统规则的构成可能无法完全解决保健政策的复杂性。本文旨在为这场辩论以及我们对医疗预算的思考方式做出贡献。版权所有©2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The influence of fiscal rules on healthcare policy in the United States and the Netherlands
Governments use fiscal rules to put a framework and limits on how budgetary challenges are addressed, but the rules themselves are still an understudied area among health policy scholars. For a long time, healthcare held a somewhat separate status because of the reliance on entitlements and dedicated revenue streams. However, the combined forces of advocates for integral decision-making, central budget control and the increasing costs might shift healthcare towards budgetary frameworks that currently apply to other spending categories. In this paper, we study fiscal rules that the US and the Netherlands have adopted since 2010 and their impact on healthcare policy. Our analysis shows that fiscal rules can have an impact on the rationing of healthcare. In the studied timeframe, the rules seem to have more impact on budget outcomes than on the budget process itself. In addition, the convergence of fiscal and program policy objectives seems to be better accomplished in a budgetary system that applies enforceable budget ceilings. Budgeting for health entitlements requires a comprehensive and tailor-made approach and the composition of traditional rules might not fully answer to the complexities of healthcare policy. This paper aims to contribute to that debate and the way we think about healthcare budgeting. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
COVID-19 vaccine wastage in Africa: A case of Nigeria. Financial issues in times of a COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary hospital in Mali. Improving access to maternal care in Africa through telemedicine and digital health. Foresight study on online health community: The perspective of knowledge empowerment for patients with chronic diseases. Evaluation of supply sustainability of vaccine alternatives with multi-criteria decision-making methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1