Health financing in healthcare economics has been essential in analyzing how individuals generate and allocate financial resources in health systems. Part of this discipline is the analysis of sociopolitical and economic factors in driving consumer spending. On one hand, socioeconomic factors study how economic behavior interacts with social processes to impact healthcare. Contrarily, sociopolitical factors examine how individuals combine social and political factors to impact health through policy. This assignment compares socioeconomic and sociopolitical factors given their impact on healthcare finance and patient care from a nursing perspective.
The sociopolitical factors refer to the extent to which individuals let the existence of an interaction between societal and political issues. These factors play an important role in defining healthcare delivery and financing policy. They include current political regime and stability, press freedom, employment legislation, user-protection legislation, and tax-based policies. Ideally, governments that value their citizens are peaceful and promote stability for the benefit of their citizens and potential patients. Most definitely, such governments use stability to shape their citizens’ access to health care. Contrarily, however, unstable regimes breed an atmosphere where numerous patients have an inferior perception and chance to finance their health. Such perceptions would result in a decline in healthcare investment even though there is an ever-increasing demand (Shwetha and Bhat, 2014).
Second, like the above indicator, press freedom, and tax-based policies also play a vital function in determining one’s health status. In essence, individuals in governments that appreciate press freedom and favorable tax-based systems almost protect their citizen’s access to healthcare. They also cultivate an environment where citizens feel like they belong to a government that values their health care expenditure. In return, they invest in financing systems deemed favorable for their long-term care practices (Bodenheimer and Grumbach, 2012).
Finally, employment legislation and user-protection legislation are vital performers in defining health care finance systems. For instance, employer legislations dictate the extent to which employees can access subsidized healthcare from the company’s perspective. Such employees have access to insurance plans that encourage preventive care, hence an increased level of health outcomes. Also, governments that protect healthcare users through legislation enhance their ability to purchase and utilize health-related services (Mosadeghrad, 2014).
Contrarily, socioeconomic factors encompass all the social and economic elements that drive or constrain one’s spending behavior. Three major factors under this category influence health care financing, including education, the level of income, and place of resident. Patients, most likely, use education to shape the extent to which their health statuses can contribute to their overall welfare. That is, the higher the education level the high the likelihood that patients have a superior perception of their individual health. Such perceptions could also result in an increase in healthcare investment in favor or insurance plans (Allin, Masseria, and Mossialos, 2009).
Second, like education, individual income and occupation play a crucial role in determining one’s socioeconomic status. For instance, high paying careers place individuals in high socio-economic statuses. Such individuals belong to a superior social class that prioritizes stable health care financing systems. In essence, they become premium buyers who use insurance plans as opposed to out-of-pocket payments. The drive pushes them towards possessing the ability to buy preventive healthcare thus attaining desirable health outcomes (Filc, Davidovich, Novack, and Balicer, 2014).
Finally, the houses and neighborhoods in which individuals reside also play a vital role in defining their health care finance systems. For starters, neighborhoods will often group patients into socially conforming groups comprising of individuals to similar backgrounds and income streams. In urban setups, individuals have always established their areas of residence based on similar consumption patterns. That said, patients from blue collar backgrounds often settle in neighborhoods that house their “kind.” Such neighborhoods are characteristic of low health care spenders. The low-level financing system would imply a decline in health statuses, and vice versa (Senterfitt, Teusch, Shih, and Long, 2013).
References
Allin, S., Masseria, C., & Mossialos, E. (2009). Measuring Socioeconomic Differences in Use of Health Care Services by Wealth Versus by Income. American Journal of Public Health, 99 (10), 1849–1855.
Bodenheimer, T., & Grumbach, K. (2012). Understanding health policy: A clinical approach. San Francisco, CA: McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing.
Filc, D., Davidovich, N., Novack, L., & Balicer, R. (2014). Is socioeconomic status associated with utilization of health care services in a single-payer universal health care system? International Journal for Equity in Health, 13 (115). doi:10.1186/s12939-014-0115-1
Mosadeghrad, M. (2014). Factors influencing healthcare service quality. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 3 (2), 77–89.
Senterfitt, W., Teusch, S., Shih, M., & Long, A. (2013). Social Determinants of Health: How Social and Economic Factors Affect Health. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
Shwetha, H. L., & Bhat, P. K. (2014). Changing World of Health Care Finance: Private and Social Health Insurance . Universal Journal of Public Health, 2 (3), 91-96.
