WorldwideHealthcareMarkets世界醫(yī)療保健市場(chǎng)MARKETCLUSTERS–OVERVIEWPRELIMINARYFinancialprotectionQualityofpublicsystemDegreeofcoverage*DevelopmentofPHI**marketInformationandguidanceDemandforinformationandguidanceManagementofcareDegreeofdevelopmentQualityDeliveryofcareQualityofpublicprovidersQualityofprivateprovidersSizeofPHI**market,estimate2021EURbillionsUSA~1,078Beta~65Gamma~23Delta~22DegreeofdevelopmentofhealthcaresystemLowHighAlpha~119市場(chǎng)群體劃分財(cái)務(wù)保護(hù)公共效勞系統(tǒng)的質(zhì)量覆蓋程度私人健康險(xiǎn)*市場(chǎng)的興旺程度信息與指導(dǎo)對(duì)信息與指導(dǎo)的需求醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生的管理興旺程度質(zhì)量醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生的提供公立提供者的質(zhì)量私立提供者的質(zhì)量*預(yù)計(jì)2021年私人健康險(xiǎn)市場(chǎng)的規(guī)模(單位：10億歐元)美國(guó)~1,078Beta~65Gamma~23Delta~22醫(yī)療系統(tǒng)的興旺程度低高Alpha~119COUNTRYCLUSTERS

Source: MunichRe,McKinseyBetaArgentinaAruba,

Bonaire,CuracaoBrazilChileCyprusGreeceItalyJordanLebanonKoreaMexicoPeruSaudiArabiaTurkeyUnitedArabEmiratesUKGammaCentralAmericaHongKongIndonesiaPhilippinesMalaysiaSouthAfricaVenezuelaAlphaAustriaBelgiumCanadaColombiaDenmarkFinlandGermanyFranceIsraelJapanNetherlandsNorwayPortugalSingaporeSpainSwedenSwitzerlandDeltaBelorussiaBoliviaBulgariaChinaCzechRepublicEcuadorEstoniaEx-JugoslaviaGeorgiaHungaryIndiaLatviaLithuaniaMoldaviaPolandRomaniaRussiaSlovakiaSloveniaSriLankaThailandUkraineWITHOUTUSA國(guó)家群

Source: MunichRe,McKinseyBeta阿根廷阿魯巴島,

博內(nèi)爾島,庫拉索島巴西智利塞浦路斯希臘意大利約旦黎巴嫩韓國(guó)墨西哥秘魯沙特阿拉伯土爾其阿拉伯聯(lián)合酋長(zhǎng)國(guó)英國(guó)Gamma中美洲香港印尼菲律賓馬來西亞南非委內(nèi)瑞拉Alpha奧地利比利時(shí)加拿大哥倫比亞丹麥芬蘭德國(guó)法國(guó)以色列日本荷蘭挪威葡萄牙新加坡西班牙瑞典瑞士Delta白俄羅斯玻利維亞保加利亞中國(guó)捷克厄瓜多爾愛沙尼亞原-南斯拉夫喬治亞匈牙利印度拉脫維亞立陶宛摩爾達(dá)維亞波蘭羅馬尼亞俄羅斯斯洛伐克斯洛文尼亞斯里蘭卡泰國(guó)烏克蘭美國(guó)除外HEALTHEXPENDITUREINPUBLICANDPRIVATESECTORPERCLUSTER,1998 * Includesprivatehealthinsurance,out-of-pocket

disbursement,andotherexpenditures Source: WHO,McKinseyInEURbillionsOut-of-pocketdisbursementforhealthClusterAlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUSPublichealthexpenditure765556ClusterAlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUSPrivatehealthexpenditure*685ClusterAlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUSPrivatehealthinsuranceexpenditure415ClusterAlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUSTotalhealthexpenditure1,2401,021ClusterAlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUS1998年醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生支出分類 * 包括私人健康保險(xiǎn)，個(gè)人自付費(fèi)用及其它支出 Source: WHO,McKinsey(單位：10億歐元)個(gè)人自付用于醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生的支出國(guó)家群AlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUS公共醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生支出765556國(guó)家群AlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUS私立醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生支出*685國(guó)家群AlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUS私人健康險(xiǎn)支出415國(guó)家群AlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUS總的醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生支出1,2401,021國(guó)家群AlphaBetaGam-

maDeltaUS Amongtheadvancedeconomies,fivedifferenthealthacresystemshaveemergedNationalServicesModel(UK)NationalHealthInsuranceModel(Canada)SocialInsuranceModel(Germany)SocialInsurancewithVoluntaryPrivateInsurance(Australia)VoluntaryHealthInsurance(U.S.A.)Overview>> 興旺的經(jīng)濟(jì)體制形成了五種不同的醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生體系模式國(guó)家效勞模式〔英國(guó)〕國(guó)家醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)模式〔加拿大〕社會(huì)醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)模式〔德國(guó)〕社會(huì)保險(xiǎn)與自愿私人保險(xiǎn)結(jié)合模式〔澳大利亞〕自愿健康保險(xiǎn)模式〔美國(guó)〕概覽>>NationalServiceModelU.K.NationalHealthInsuranceModelCanadaSocialInsuranceModelGermanySocialInsurancewithVoluntaryPrivateInsuranceAustraliaUSAVoluntaryHealthInsuranceWelfare

StateIndividual

Responsibility(U.K.;Italy;Spain)(France;Belgium)(Germany;Netherlands)>>Overview國(guó)家服務(wù)模式英國(guó)國(guó)家醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)模式加拿大社會(huì)醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)模式德國(guó)社會(huì)保險(xiǎn)與自愿私人保險(xiǎn)結(jié)合模式澳大利亞美國(guó)自愿健康保險(xiǎn)模式福利國(guó)家個(gè)人負(fù)責(zé)制>>概覽NationalServiceModel(U.K.)StrengthMorehealthinformationMostequitable(fair)HighertransparencyCost-effectiveMoretailoredcareservicesIntegrationofprimarycare,specialityandcommunityservicesGreaterdecisionmakingpowerFreechoiceofGP’sLowhealthexpenditureinflationDraw-backLongwaitinglistforspecialityservices國(guó)家效勞模式(英國(guó))優(yōu)點(diǎn)：更多的醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生信息，最公平本錢效益具有更高的透明度將初級(jí)護(hù)理，特殊護(hù)理及社團(tuán)效勞融為一體，具有更多有針對(duì)性的效勞對(duì)醫(yī)生的自由選擇有更大的決定權(quán)醫(yī)療衛(wèi)生支出增長(zhǎng)較低缺乏之處：特殊效勞的需求要經(jīng)過長(zhǎng)期等待SocialInsuranceModel(Germany)StrengthQuiteequitable(fair)CapabletomanagehealthexpenditureinflationthroughnegotiationsBalanceofdemandandsupplyFreechoiceofprovidersDraw-backInefficiencySeparationofprimarycarefromspecialityandhospitalcare社會(huì)醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)模式(德國(guó))優(yōu)點(diǎn)：相當(dāng)公平能夠通過協(xié)商管理醫(yī)療費(fèi)用的上漲供需平衡醫(yī)療效勞提供者的自由選擇缺乏之處：效率不夠初級(jí)護(hù)理與特殊護(hù)理及住院治療別離VoluntaryHealthInsurance(USA)StrengthChoiceofdifferent“quality〞levelsofserviceServicesarepatient-centredRapidorganisationalinnovationsDraw-back15%uninsuredExpenditureinflationishardtomanageHighadministrativecosts自愿健康保險(xiǎn)模式(美國(guó))優(yōu)勢(shì)：不同效勞檔次的選擇以患者為核心的效勞快速的機(jī)構(gòu)革新缺乏之處：15%的未保人群費(fèi)用上漲難于控制很高的管理本錢BalanceTren