Healthcare Systems in Ethiopia, Guyana and Austria
Introduction
The healthcare system monitoring and evaluation is a multifaceted phenomenon that significantly impacts the quality of services rendered to the global human population. The World Health Organization (2010) researched the key variables that foster medical care and established six main building blocks. The pillars encompass governances, financing, access to essential medicines, health information structure, the practitioners’ workforce, and value delivery. Despite the standardization of the features in deliverables, different countries effectively implement some of the pillars while failing in others. This study focuses on the comparison between Ethiopia, Guyana, and Austria regarding the implementation of the WHO standards of healthcare services.
Comparing and Contrasting
The three countries focus on enhancing sustainability under the spectrum of healthcare management. On the one hand, there is a significant disparity regarding each government’s policies mainly because of the dynamic levels of economic performance. On the other hand, all administrations focus on achieving the set standards by WHO to boost the quality of living among the citizens. Healthcare is an essential sector across human society mainly because it charts the various parameters of engagements and associations.
Ethiopia’s Healthcare System
One of the prominent issues challenging the Ethiopian government encompasses improving the quality of healthcare services and equity. Assefa et al. (2018) argue that the implementation of the diagonal investment approach contributed to the improvement in primary healthcare, well-being status, and the coverage of the disease control programs. The researchers establish the Ethiopian government achieved financing, governance, and access to important medicines. As a result, the key weaknesses in the structure encompass the installation of functional information systems, boosting the ratio of practitioners’ workforce to patients, and the delivery of value to the citizens. As a low-income country, it is vital to identify the strengths and weaknesses in Ethiopia’s medical care to determine the solution and attain the global standards set by the World Health Organization.
Guyana’s Healthcare System
Guyana faces a key challenge in boosting the efficiency of the healthcare delivery system mainly because of the dynamic views regarding the policy framework. The country’s governance mainly focuses on stabilizing and eradicating the persistent conflicts among the different communities. In this case, the administration concentrates on the essence of harmonious living with minimal attention to the hallmark of medical care services. According to Baluch (2019), the infrastructural and institutional underdevelopment threatens the ideal elevation to the standard elements of quality healthcare. The researcher further indicates that apart from the poor infrastructure, the nation lacks an effective educational curriculum to empower medical practitioners with adequate skills and knowledge. As a result, a significant percentage of nursing students travel abroad to attain expertise. The Guyana government geared the attainment of management and financing with the other standard healthcare building blocks prevailing as the core weaknesses. It is crucial the administration establishes frameworks that empower the field with the aim of enhancing the well-being of the citizens.
Austria’s Healthcare System
Austria’s success in achieving the main goal of quality healthcare services encompasses the ability to foster efficient accessibility and effective treatment. The government initially promoted the decentralization of the institutions. As a result, practitioners in different departments focused on establishing independent centers with the aim of reaping profits from the business. However, Fröschl et al. (2019) establish that the change in the policy spearheaded the increase in the quality of delivery by the professionals. On the one hand, the Austrian administration implemented the necessity for a multi-professional platform to coordinate the operations. On the other hand, the initiative boosted the level of healthcare management with optimal stakeholders’ participation. In this case, the Austrian healthcare system qualifies all tiers stipulated by WHO mainly because of aligning the interests of all parties involved in the field of expertise.
Conclusion
The World Health Organization developed the different building blocks that monitor and evaluate healthcare systems to establish a standard operation guideline. The three countries, that is, Ethiopia, Austria, and Guyana represent different levels of economic class globally. Therefore, the administrations focus on dynamic priorities to enhance the competence and effectiveness of treatment strategies. It is vital that the governments establish mechanisms that enhance the optimal delivery of medical care to the respective nationalities.
References
Assefa, Y., Tesfaye, D., Damme, W. V., & Hill, P. S. (2018). Effectiveness and sustainability of a diagonal investment approach to strengthen the primary health-care system in Ethiopia. The Lancet, 392(10156), 1473–1481. Web.
Baluch, N. (2019). Probing Guyana’s provenance of underdevelopment per Doctrine of Discovery, Degenerated Democracy & Kleptocracy. Archives of Business Research, 7(12), 19–49. Web.
Fröschl, B., Antony, K., Ivansitis, S., & Piso, B. (2019). Evaluation of Austrias first PHC: What lessons can be learned? European Journal of Public Health, 29(4), 584–586. Web.
World Health Organization. (2010). Monitoring the building blocks of health systems: A handbook of indicators and their measurement strategies. World Health Organization. Web.