Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Improving access to healthcare in Ireland: an implementation failure

      Health Economics, Policy and Law
      Cambridge University Press (CUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          There are significant barriers to accessing health and social care services in Ireland including high user charges, long waits and limited availability of some services. While a number of reform proposals have committed to improving access to health care, implementation of these proposals has been limited. The aim of this paper is to identify and discuss policy implementation failures concerned with improving access to health and social care services in Ireland. Four potential reasons for the repeated failure to implement stated reform proposals are identified including a failure to identify and address the practicalities of implementation, competing health care demands, the political cycle and stakeholder resistance. While there has been a shift in Irish health care policy documents in the last 10 years with increasing emphasis on ensuring access to health care based on need rather than ability to pay, a repeated failure to implement the proposed reforms raises questions as to whether there is a real commitment to improving access to health care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The strength of primary care in Europe: an international comparative study.

          A suitable definition of primary care to capture the variety of prevailing international organisation and service-delivery models is lacking. Evaluation of strength of primary care in Europe. International comparative cross-sectional study performed in 2009-2010, involving 27 EU member states, plus Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Turkey. Outcome measures covered three dimensions of primary care structure: primary care governance, economic conditions of primary care, and primary care workforce development; and four dimensions of primary care service-delivery process: accessibility, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care. The primary care dimensions were operationalised by a total of 77 indicators for which data were collected in 31 countries. Data sources included national and international literature, governmental publications, statistical databases, and experts' consultations. Countries with relatively strong primary care are Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK. Countries either have many primary care policies and regulations in place, combined with good financial coverage and resources, and adequate primary care workforce conditions, or have consistently only few of these primary care structures in place. There is no correlation between the access, continuity, coordination, and comprehensiveness of primary care of countries. Variation is shown in the strength of primary care across Europe, indicating a discrepancy in the responsibility given to primary care in national and international policy initiatives and the needed investments in primary care to solve, for example, future shortages of workforce. Countries are consistent in their primary care focus on all important structure dimensions. Countries need to improve their primary care information infrastructure to facilitate primary care performance management.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Policy failure and the policy-implementation gap: can policy support programs help?

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Moving towards universal health coverage: lessons from 11 country studies.

              In recent years, many countries have adopted universal health coverage (UHC) as a national aspiration. In response to increasing demand for a systematic assessment of global experiences with UHC, the Government of Japan and the World Bank collaborated on a 2-year multicountry research programme to analyse the processes of moving towards UHC. The programme included 11 countries (Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia, France, Ghana, Indonesia, Japan, Peru, Thailand, Turkey, and Vietnam), representing diverse geographical, economic, and historical contexts. The study identified common challenges and opportunities and useful insights for how to move towards UHC. The study showed that UHC is a complex process, fraught with challenges, many possible pathways, and various pitfalls--but is also feasible and achievable. Movement towards UHC is a long-term policy engagement that needs both technical knowledge and political know-how. Technical solutions need to be accompanied by pragmatic and innovative strategies that address the national political economy context.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Health Economics, Policy and Law
                HEPL
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                1744-1331
                1744-134X
                January 2024
                August 22 2023
                January 2024
                : 19
                : 1
                : 46-56
                Article
                10.1017/S1744133123000130
                fc7b4e49-9f4d-4c81-867c-9bcc69810bb9
                © 2024

                https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article