Amalgamating Provincial Health Authorities Assessing the Experience of Nova Scotia
Main Article Content
Abstract
Reflecting the shift away from regionalized health governance in Canada's provinces, the Nova Scotia government consolidated its nine Distinct Health Authorities into the single Nova Scotia Health Authority as of 1 April 2015. Regionalized health administration had originally been expected to produce economic efficiencies but, after two decades, a fragmented system of health governance was increasingly perceived as inflexible, uneven, and expensive. A more centralized system was presented as a means of reducing administrative costs, promoting scale economies, allowing greater flexibility, and facilitating standardization, which would in turn lead to significant savings. Five years on, however, the expected cost savings have not materialized. While there has been more success in standardization of services, not all attempts at standardization have led to greater efficiency. Evidence for greater flexibility is mixed. Problems with amalgamating health authorities include opportunity costs incurred by thoroughgoing reform, ambiguous and diminished accountability, administrative bottlenecks, decreased responsiveness, and poor working relationships with health care professionals leading to issues of access to health care services.
Suivant le mouvement de dé-régionalisation amorcé dans d'autres provinces canadiennes, le gouvernement de Nouvelle Écosse a consolidé ses neuf Autorités de Santé Distinctes en une seule autorité sanitaire le 1er avril 2015. Initialement, l'attente était que la régionalisation de l'administration sanitaire apporterait des gains d'efficience, mais, après deux décennies, les systèmes fragmentés de gouvernance de la santé ont été perçus comme rigides, injustes et coûteux. Recentraliser le système a été présenté comme un moyen de réduire les coûts administratifs, de promouvoir des économies d'échelle, de permettre une plus grande flexibilité, et de faciliter la standardisation pour générer des économies substantielles. Après cinq années, cependant, les économies attendues ne se sont pas matérialisées. Même si la standardisation des services a été plus réussie, il n'en reste pas moins que la standardisation n'a pas toujours amélioré l'efficience. L'évidence empirique sur l'amélioration de la flexibilité est tiède. Parmi les problèmes liés à la consolidation des autorités sanitaires, on peut citer des coûts d'opportunité liés à la mise en place de la réforme, une moindre transparence comptable, des goulots d'étranglement administratifs, une moindre attention aux attentes des usagers, et des relations détériorées avec les professionels de santé amenant des problèmes d'accès aux soins.
Metrics
Article Details
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).