Beyond health gain: : the range of health system benefits expressed by social groups in Mexico and Central America
Current health reform proposals in most developing countries stress health gain as the chief evaluation criterion. Essential service packages are formulated using cost-effectiveness methods for the selection of interventions without sufficient regard for other factors that are significant for successful implementation and acceptance by the needy. This paper presents the results of research undertaken in Mexico and Central America to test the hypothesis that population groups view health gain as only one among several benefits derived from health systems. The goal at this stage was two-fold: (a) to identify through qualitative methods the range of benefits that are significant for a wide cross-section of social groups and (b) to classify such benefits in types amenable to be used in the development of instruments to measure the benefits intended and actually produced by health systems. Fourteen focus groups were undertaken in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico and Nicaragua representing diverse age, gender, occupation and social conditions. Six major types of health system benefits were identified besides health gain: reassurance/uncertainty reduction, economic security, confidence in health system quality, financial benefits derived from the system, health care process utility and health system fairness. Benefits most often mentioned can be classed under health care process utility and confidence in system quality. They also have the most consensus across social groups. Other benefits mentioned have an affinity with social conditions. Human resource-derived utility stands out by its frequency in the range of benefits mentioned. Health systems and health sector reform proposals must emphasise those aspects of quality related to human resources to be in accord with population expectations.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 52 (2001)
Issue (Month): 10 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:52:y:2001:i:10:p:1537-1550. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.