29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Why are there so many hospital beds in Germany?

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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

          The place of hospitals in health systems is undergoing rapid change worldwide due to the high cost of hospital care and the changing health needs of the population. The Covid-19 pandemic has recently drawn public attention towards hospital capacity and has added new urgency to discussions on the future role of hospitals. In this context, recent experience in Germany provides valuable information for health systems seeking to manage hospital capacity. Despite reform efforts to reduce hospital capacity, Germany has the highest rates of intensive care beds among high-income countries and the highest overall hospital capacity in Europe. The capacity of the German hospital system can be explained in large part by the high number of elderly in-patients. This, in turn, is driven by (1) a fragmented ambulatory care system; (2) physicians admitting and maintaining elderly patients in hospital at a high rate; (3) a hospital market adding incentives to admit patients; and (4) a political commitment to egalitarian access and universal care. Additionally, recent policies to reduce hospital capacity have had limited impact because hospitals have not responded to financial incentives in the expected manner. Countries looking to learn from Germany’s hospital capacity must therefore consider systemic features, political commitments, and unintended policy consequences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

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

          Health systems resilience in managing the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from 28 countries

          Health systems resilience is key to learning lessons from country responses to crises such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this perspective, we review COVID-19 responses in 28 countries using a new health systems resilience framework. Through a combination of literature review, national government submissions and interviews with experts, we conducted a comparative analysis of national responses. We report on domains addressing governance and financing, health workforce, medical products and technologies, public health functions, health service delivery and community engagement to prevent and mitigate the spread of COVID-19. We then synthesize four salient elements that underlie highly effective national responses and offer recommendations toward strengthening health systems resilience globally.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High-Income Countries

            Health care spending in the United States is a major concern and is higher than in other high-income countries, but there is little evidence that efforts to reform US health care delivery have had a meaningful influence on controlling health care spending and costs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Fragility fractures in Europe: burden, management and opportunities

              Summary This report provides an overview and a comparison of the burden and management of fragility fractures in the largest five countries of the European Union plus Sweden (EU6). In 2017, new fragility fractures in the EU6 are estimated at 2.7 million with an associated annual cost of €37.5 billion and a loss of 1.0 million quality-adjusted life years. Introduction Osteoporosis is characterized by reduced bone mass and strength, which increases the risk of fragility fractures, which in turn, represent the main consequence of the disease. This report provides an overview and a comparison of the burden and management of fragility fractures in the largest five EU countries and Sweden (designated the EU6). Methods A series of metrics describing the burden and management of fragility fractures were defined by a scientific steering committee. A working group performed the data collection and analysis. Data were collected from current literature, available retrospective data and public sources. Different methods were applied (e.g. standard statistics and health economic modelling), where appropriate, to perform the analysis for each metric. Results Total fragility fractures in the EU6 are estimated to increase from 2.7 million in 2017 to 3.3 million in 2030; a 23% increase. The resulting annual fracture-related costs (€37.5 billion in 2017) are expected to increase by 27%. An estimated 1.0 million quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were lost in 2017 due to fragility fractures. The current disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 1000 individuals age 50 years or more were estimated at 21 years, which is higher than the estimates for stroke or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The treatment gap (percentage of eligible individuals not receiving treatment with osteoporosis drugs) in the EU6 is estimated to be 73% for women and 63% for men; an increase of 17% since 2010. If all patients who fracture in the EU6 were enrolled into fracture liaison services, at least 19,000 fractures every year might be avoided. Conclusions Fracture-related burden is expected to increase over the coming decades. Given the substantial treatment gap and proven cost-effectiveness of fracture prevention schemes such as fracture liaison services, urgent action is needed to ensure that all individuals at high risk of fragility fracture are appropriately assessed and treated. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11657-020-0706-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Health Services Management Research
                Health Serv Manage Res
                SAGE Publications
                0951-4848
                1758-1044
                February 2023
                March 24 2022
                February 2023
                : 36
                : 1
                : 75-81
                Affiliations
                [1 ]LIEPP, Sciences Po, Paris, France
                [2 ]Evangelisches Krankenhaus Königin Elisabeth Herzberge gGmbH, Berlin, Germany
                [3 ]Independant research Consultant, Cambridge, USA
                [4 ]Association for the Use of Data and Analysis of Health Systems, Paris, France
                [5 ]Montpellier University Faculty of Law and Political Science, Montpellier, France
                Article
                10.1177/09514848221080691
                35331042
                7673d815-58da-4d5c-b320-db85cea53e3f
                © 2023

                http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article