The UK's relationship with the European Union (EU) is now embodied in two principal legal instruments: the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which formally entered into force on 1 May 2021; and the Withdrawal Agreement, with its Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, which continues to apply. Using a ‘building blocks’ framework for analysis of national health systems derived from the World Health Organisation, this article examines the likely impacts in the UK of this legal settlement on the National Health Service (NHS), health and social care. Specifically, we determine the extent to which the trade, cooperation and regulatory aspects of those legal measures support positive impacts for the NHS and social care. We show that, as there is clear support for positive health and care outcomes in only one of the 17 NHS ‘building blocks’, unless mitigating action is taken, the likely outcomes will be detrimental. However, as the legal settlement gives the UK a great deal of regulatory freedom, especially in Great Britain, we argue that it is crucial to track the effects of proposed new health and social care-related policy choices in the months and years ahead.

At least 100,000 retired UK citizens currently live in Spain. Under EU law, they are entitled to access the Spanish National Health Service (NHS) with minimum administrative difficulty. What will their legal position be under a ‘no-deal Brexit’? This is a question of Spanish law. The worst case scenario is that they will have to reapply for their residence permits under the Spanish legislation applicable to non-EU/European Economic Area citizens, with all the administrative inconvenience and cost entailed. If they successfully reapply, their personal health care costs will be considerably higher than at present, should they choose to remain in Spain. Very obvious questions of capacity planning arise. The Spanish system will potentially need to gear up for a significant administrative effort. Given the distinct possibility of a ‘no-deal Brexit’, the UK NHS should prepare to welcome significant numbers of pensioners home.

The Sustainable Development Goals set by the United Nations recognize the importance of making progress in the eradication and treatment of sexually transmitted deceases (STD). STD are among the most widespread diseases in the world and have the highest prevalence in Sub-Saharan Africa. The current study explored the associations between the allocation of the development assistance for health (DAH) in 54 African countries and key development indicators – STD incidence, Gross Domestic Product per capita, health expenditure, and life expectancy at birth. It employed descriptive statistical methods, the matrix scatter plot analysis and the Pearson correlation test for this purpose. The findings indicated that there was a considerable increase in the volume of the DAH given to control and prevent STD in Africa over the period of 2002–2011. A statistically significant positive association was detected between the STD incidence and the health aid allocations. At the same time, the imbalance in the distribution of the health aid between the major and minor aid recipients in the continent increased. The study concludes by discussing policy implications that can be drawn from these findings.

Calum Paton’s article reads like a howl of pain when faced with the history of the past 20 years of ‘market-like’ reform to the NHS and the prospect of what is to come. Typically, he makes some powerful points. Not least, he highlights some of the unresolved tensions in current health policy. It does indeed remain pretty much of a mystery quite how patient choice, practice-based commissioning, and commissioning by primary care trusts will knit together, let alone how all NHS Trusts, foundation or not, are meant to make a profit (surplus) within a cash-limited system. But, while his article contains a litany of the problems, both actual and potential, that the ‘new NHS’ may bring, it is missing a counter factual. It contains an unspoken assumption that these changes are being made, almost willfully, to a system that was functioning, if not perfectly, then pretty well.

It is known that social inequities result in health disparities in outcomes, highlighted in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This commentary discusses the actionable initiatives that have been implemented to address social inequities in healthcare in the United States. The publicly available social needs screening tools and International Classification of Disease Systems-10 Z codes for social determinants of health are introduced. In this context, policies, health system strategies and the larger role of implementation science in recognizing and alleviating the social needs are discussed.

In recent years, several emerging economies have introduced national health insurance programs ensuring access to health care while offering financial protection from out-of-pocket and catastrophic expenses. Nevertheless, in several nations these expenses continue to increase. While recent research has emphasized the lack of funding, poor policy design and corruption as the main culprits, little is known about the politics of establishing federal regulatory agencies ensuring that state governments adhere to national insurance reimbursement and coverage procedures. This article fills in this lacuna by providing an alternative perspective, one that accounts for differences between nations in the creation of regulatory institutions, with an emphasis instead on governing elite strategies to campaign on access to health care during transitions to democracy, civil societal mobilization, constitutional constraints and the national electoral incentives to overcome ineffective decentralization processes. The cases of Indonesia and China are introduced as examples of how and why their differences in this political process accounted for Indonesia’s success and China’s failure to ensure financial protection.

The demand for publicly subsidised health care services is insatiable, but the costs can be contained in different ways: formal rules can limit access to and the number of subsidised services, demand and supply can be regulated through the price mechanism, the relevant profession can contain the costs through state-sanctioned self-regulation, and other professions can contain the costs (e.g. through referrals). The use of these cost containment measures varies between countries, depending on demand and supply factors, but the relative professional status of the health professions may help explain why different countries use cost containment measures differently for different services. This article compares cost containment measures in Denmark and Norway because these countries vary with regard to the professional status of the medical profession relative to other health care providers, while other relevant variables are approximately similar. The investigation is based on formal agreements and rules, historical documents, existing analyses and an analysis of 360 newspaper articles. It shows that high relative professional status seems to help professions to avoid user fees, steer clear of regulation from other professions and regulate the services produced by others. This implies that relative professional status should be taken into consideration in analyses of health care cost containment.

In Canada, there is an ongoing debate about whether to expand Medicare to include a national pharmaceutical benefit on a universal basis. The potential health benefits are understood to be significant, but there are ongoing concerns about affordability. In Israel, the National Health Insurance benefits package includes a comprehensive pharmaceutical benefit. Nonetheless, per capita pharmaceutical spending is well below that of Canada and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development average. This paper highlights seven strategies that Israel has employed to constrain pharmaceutical spending: (1) prioritizing new technologies, subject to a global budget constraint; (2) using regulations and market power to secure fair and reasonable prices; (3) establishing an efficient pharmaceutical distribution system; (4) promoting effective prescribing behavior; (5) avoiding artificial inflation of consumer demand; (6) striking an appropriate balance between respect for IP rights, access and cost containment; and (7) developing a shared societal understanding about the value and limits of pharmaceutical spending. Some of these strategies are already in place in some parts of Canada. Others could be introduced into Canada, and might contribute to the affordability of a national pharmaceutical benefit, but substantial adaptation would be needed. For example, in Israel the health maintenance organizations (HMOs) play a central role in promoting effective prescribing behavior, whereas in HMO-free Canada other mechanisms are needed to advance this important goal.

Nurse workforce shortages put healthcare systems under pressure, moving the nursing profession into the core of healthcare policymaking. In this paper, we shift the focus from workforce policy to workforce politics and highlight the political role of nurses in healthcare systems in England, Spain, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Using a comparative discursive institutionalist approach, we study how nurses are organised and represented in these four countries. We show how nurse politics plays out at the levels of representation, working conditions, career building, and by breaking with the public healthcare system. Although there are differences between the countries – with nurses in England and Spain under more pressure than in the Netherlands and Sweden – nurses are often not represented in policy discourses; not just because of institutional ignorance but also because of fragmentation of the profession itself. This institutional ignorance and lack of collective representation, we argue, requires attention to foster the role and position of nurses in contemporary healthcare systems.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is tasked with the ‘attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health’, yet, it is widely struggling to meet this mandate, and COVID-19 has revealed significant limitations of the organisation. Despite clear guidance provided by the institution as to how best to respond to the pathogen, many governments departed from WHO's guidance in their response efforts. Is this a new crisis for WHO? Does WHO need to restore its legitimacy in the eyes of the global community? As renewed calls for changes to WHO emerge, in this perspective we lay out the obstacles WHO face to become the WHO ‘we’ need. The assumption is that UN member states need an empowered and well-funded organisation. Yet, many years of discussion of reform of WHO have failed to lead to meaningful change, and glaring challenges remain in its financing, governance and politics, which are considered in turn. The reality may be that we have the WHO that UN member states need – one that can provide guidance and advice, but also take criticism for health governance failures when states want to avoid blame or responsibility. We discuss this, by analysing three key areas of WHO'S challenges: mandate and scope; structure, governance and money and domestic vs international.

This article presents an investigation into whether individuals incorporate information on their family genetic (health) endowment into decision making regarding participation in behaviours related to the production of health capital. Competing theoretical perspectives exist as to how genetic endowment should affect participation in health-related behaviours. There is also a growing consensus that the availability of genetic information holds important consequences for the individual in terms of investment in human capital, the pricing and availability of health insurance, and labour market opportunity. Therefore, the question of how individuals use the greater availability of genetic data is important. Our empirical results indicate that poor genetic endowment tends to be associated with a lower probability of participation in cigarette smoking, but also a lower probability of participation in regular exercise.

Many health care reforms rely on competition although health care differs in many respects from the assumptions of perfect competition. Finnish occupational health services provide an opportunity to study empirically competition, ownership and payment systems and the performance of providers. In these markets employers (purchasers) choose the provider and prices are market determined. The price regulation of public providers was abolished in 1995. We had data on providers from 1992, 1995, 1997, 2000 and 2004. The unbalanced panel consisted of 1145 providers and 4059 observations. Our results show that in more competitive markets providers in general offered a higher share of medical care compared to preventive services. The association between unit prices and revenues and market environment varied according to the provider type. For-profit providers had lower prices and revenues in markets with numerous providers. The public providers in more competitive regions were more sensitive to react to the abolishment of their price regulation by raising their prices. Employer governed providers had weaker association between unit prices or revenues and competition. The market share of for-profit providers was negatively associated with productivity, which was the only sign of market spillovers we found in our study.