Starfield B
Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University, School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205-1996, USA.
Int J Health Serv. 1997;27(4):687-96. doi: 10.2190/FL2W-ELJX-L54V-TYKH.
Health care reform in the United States and elsewhere raises many questions about equity and effectiveness of health services. Although the impetus has been cost containment, the reforms have often been justified on the grounds that they will enhance primary care. In this article, health care reform efforts are divided into two types: market-driven, demand-based systems versus systems predicated on meeting population health needs. The two "scenarios" are contrasted with regard to their likely impact on the attainment of primary care characteristics: first-contact care, longitudinality, comprehensive services, and coordination. Since the ultimate outcome of these reforms cannot be predicted, there is compelling need for evaluating them as they proceed.
美国及其他地区的医疗保健改革引发了许多关于医疗服务公平性和有效性的问题。尽管改革的推动力一直是成本控制,但这些改革往往基于它们将加强初级保健这一理由而被证明是合理的。在本文中,医疗保健改革努力被分为两种类型:市场驱动、基于需求的体系与基于满足人群健康需求的体系。这两种“设想”在其对实现初级保健特征(首诊服务、连续性、综合服务和协调性)的可能影响方面形成对比。由于这些改革的最终结果无法预测,因此迫切需要在改革推进过程中对其进行评估。