Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study aims at analyzing the efficiency of the health systems of 31 European countries in treating COVID-19, for the period January 1, 2020 – January 1, 2021, by incorporating some factors from a multidimensional perspective.
Methods
The methodology used in the research was Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), through which efficiency scores for health systems have been calculated. The research was performed considering three stages: the first wave (January 1–June 15), the relaxation period (June 15–October 1) and the second wave (October 1–December 31). In evaluating the determinants of the efficiency of health systems, six major fields of influence were taken into account: health care, health status, population, economic, cultural/societal and governmental issues, all covering 15 indicators. After measuring the efficiency, we used the Tobit type regression to establish the influencing elements on it.
Results
The results for the public health systems of European states were determined for each country and period. We evaluated the efficiency of health systems in Europe against COVID-19, starting from health inputs (COVID-19 cases, physicians, nurses, hospital beds, health expenditure) and output (COVID-19 deaths). The obtained outputs show that, especially in the first phase of the pandemic, the inefficiency of the health systems was quite high, mainly in Western countries (Italy, Belgium, Spain, UK). In the relaxation phase and in the second wave, the Western states, severely affected at the beginning of the pandemic, began to take adequate measures and improve the efficiency of their sanitary systems. Instead, Eastern European countries were hit hard by the inefficiency of health systems (Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Romania). After Tobit regression, results of the study show that the influencing elements are different for the three stages: concerning the first wave, comobirdities, population age, and population density are important; for relaxation period a great influence have government effectiveness and power distance; with respect to second wave, the relevant factors are education and population density.
Conclusions
The results obtained could serve as starting points for health policymakers to perform comparative analyzes in terms of good practices in the health system and to develop national plans to better deal with health crises. At the same time, they can be used internationally to achieve a coherent and effective community response to the pandemic.
Funder
Romanian Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digitization, Program 1-Development of the national R&D system, Subprogram 1.2-Institutional performance-RDI excellence financing projects,
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference39 articles.
1. Schulenburg JMG. COVID-19: not the time for health economists? A plea for more proactive health economic involvement. Eur J Health Econ. 2021;22(7):1001–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-021-01349-2.
2. Ritchie H, Mathieu E, Rodés-Guirao L, Appel C, Giattino C, Ortiz-Ospina E, Hasell J, Macdonald B, Beltekian D, Roser M. Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19). 2020. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus. [Online Resource].
3. Raghupathi V, Raghupathi W. The influence of education on health: an empirical assessment of OECD countries for the period 1995–2015. Arch Public Health. 2020;78(1):20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-020-00402-5.
4. Cutler D, Lleras-Muney A. Education and health: evaluating theories and evidence. Making Americans Healthier. Soc Econ Policy Health Policy. 2006;12352. http://www.nber.org/papers/w12352.
5. OECD Scoping paper on health system efficiency measurement, (2016), https://www.oecd.org/health/health-systems/Scoping-Paper-Measuring-efficiency-in-health-system.pdf
Cited by
56 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献