BACKGROUND: Policymakers, who are constantly discussing growing health expenditures, should know whether the health system is efficient. We can provide them with such information through international health system efficiency evaluations. The main objectives of this study are: (a) to evaluate the efficiency of health systems in 28 developed countries by multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and data envelopment analysis (DEA) and (b) to identify reasonable benchmark countries for the Czech Republic, for which we collect information on the relative importance of health system inputs and outputs. METHODS: We used MCDA and DEA to evaluate the efficiency of the health systems of 28 developed countries. The models included four health system inputs (health expenditure as a relative share of GDP, the number of physicians, nurses, and hospital beds) and three health system outputs (life expectancy at birth, healthy life expectancy, and infant mortality rate). The sample covers 27 OECD countries and Russia, which is also included in the OECD database. To determine the input and output weights, we used a questionnaire sent to health policy experts in the Czech Republic. RESULTS: We obtained subjective information on the relative importance of the health system inputs and outputs from 27 Czech health policy experts. We evaluated health system efficiency using four MCDA and two DEA models. According to the MCDA models, Turkey, Poland, and Israel were found to have efficient health systems. The Czech Republic ranked 16th, 19th, 15th, and 17th. The benchmark countries for the Czech Republic's health system were Israel, Estonia, Luxembourg, Italy, the UK, Spain, Slovenia, and Canada. The DEA model with the constant returns to scale identified four technically efficient health systems: Turkey, the UK, Canada, and Sweden. The Czech Republic was found to be one of the worst-performing health systems. The DEA model with the variable returns to scale identified 15 technically efficient health systems. We found that efficiency results are quite robust. With two exceptions, the Spearman rank correlations between each pair of models were statistically significant at the 0.05 level. CONCLUSIONS: During the model formulation, we investigated the pitfalls of efficiency measurement in health care and used several practical solutions. We consider MCDA and DEA, above all, as exploratory methods, not methods providing definitive answers.

• Keywords
• Data envelopment analysis, Health system efficiency, Multiple-criteria decision analysis, OECD,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

BACKGROUND: An international comparison of health system performance is a popular tool of health policy analysis. However, the efficiency evaluation of health systems is a practical example of an international comparison in which non-homogeneity is expected. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the efficiency of health systems by models in which a degree of non-homogeneity among countries is considered. METHODS: We study the problem of non-homogeneity of health systems in the theoretical framework of the data envelopment analysis (DEA), which is a popular method of efficiency evaluation with hundreds of applications from various fields. DEA assume the homogeneity of production units and the homogeneity of the environment in which the production units operate. Hence, we compiled a summary of 14 recommendations on how to deal with the non-homogeneity in the DEA models. The analysed sample includes 38 OECD member countries. The data are from the year 2019. RESULTS: As an example, we evaluated the health system efficiency of the Czech Republic. We used the DEA models with the neighbourhood measure of distance and the constraint limiting the comparison of countries with different levels of economic development. The health system inputs were the numbers of physicians, nurses, and hospital beds. In the production of the intermediate outputs (doctor consultations, inpatient care discharges), the Czech Republic should look at Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. In the production of health outcomes (life expectancy), the peer countries are France, Italy and Switzerland. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the DEA analysis are only indicative because no single analytical method can determine whether a health system is better or worse than others. We need to combine different methods, and DEA is one of them. We consider DEA as an exploratory method, not a method providing definitive answers.

• Keywords
• Data envelopment analysis, Efficiency evaluation, Health systems, Non-homogeneity,
• MeSH
• Efficiency, Organizational * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Government Programs MeSH
• Efficiency * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Geographicals
• France MeSH
• Poland MeSH