« Care crisis has become the new normal »
Soon, the investigation into the head of health care will submit its proposal. Regardless of who is responsible in the future, governance and financing need to be more long -term. The government should take the initiative for a health care preparation, and a plan that extends at least one term.
Three years ago, the Medical Association urged the government to appoint a crisis commission for healthcare in an article on DN Debate (14/1 2022). The care was extremely pressured. The queues were long, the lack of space large and the working environment unsustainable. The problems had been built up for a long time – and the Coronapandemia became the drop that caused an already boarded beaker to run over.
We got a great response. Both the then government and the opposition parties responded to our appeal. They invited meetings, and presented various proposals that were in line with our requirements. Prior to the election, the Riksdag’s parties competed to come up with solutions, even if they did not agree on a just crisis commission.
The provision of skills is stuck in an evil spiral
But three years later, no improvements are visible in our members’ everyday lives. Primary care remains under -dimensioned. The queues have grown and the places of care have become even fewer. The provision of skills is stuck in an evil spiral: poor working environment means that competent employees are hooked and fleeing, and then the pressure on those who remain even more severe.
The crisis commission that we called for three years ago is still needed. For the working environment, despite the gloomy situation after the pandemic, the pandemic has not improved. What we then described as a crisis has today developed into a normal state, which requires more than temporary measures.
It’s on National level A broad political unity in many important health issues. Primary care needs to be expanded to be the basis of Swedish health care. More care places and a work environment are needed that makes employees want to stay. The Riksdag has made several decisions and various authorities have been given a number of assignments.
Steps have also been taken in the right direction. The National Board of Health and Welfare has been given several assignments that clarify the state’s priorities, for example about more care places. It is also good that the Care Responsibility Committee has been commissioned to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of a full or part of the state headmanship for health care. The system deserves a transparency. But the deeper we analyze the question, the clearer it becomes that the main manpower cannot in itself solve the problems of care.
The governance of Swedish Today, healthcare is characterized by jerky and point efforts at all levels. Decision makers both in regions and within the state poles, but lose the whole. This means that the necessary reforms to deal with important challenges in healthcare do not become a reality. In the end, it affects the opportunities to provide good care throughout the country.
By 2023, there were 84 different targeted government grants that the regions could take part in, all with different purposes, conditions and requirements for the application and reporting. And although some of them have the same heading year after year, the content at the detail level changes annually.
For example, no region can hire more general practitioners for money paid out in November – and may not come at all the following year
Even in cases where the purpose there is urgent, short -term efforts can rarely make any difference in the everyday life of care. For example, no region can employ more general practitioners for money paid out in November – and may not come at all the following year.
Health care Needs a control and funding that is sustainable in the long term. The conditions for managing the challenges of care would be significantly improved if state governance was more long -term and strategic – regardless of the main team. The care deserves the same long-term governance and funding as, for example, research, infrastructure and defense policy. There, the government lays large, broadly anchored, propositions every four years, with the focus for the next four years.
The Medical Association therefore proposes that the government regularly present a health care plan that covers at least one term of office, with the most important state priorities and the financial framework for the state’s investments.
A role model may be the Defense Committee
To ensure Well-established and broad agreements, work on the health plan should to a large extent be done in a committee or working group where many actors are represented. A role model may be the Defense Committee.
One way to create a health care preparation could simply be to extend or permanent healthcare responsibility committee, where politicians at national and regional level receive input from experts, experts and regional representatives. It would also create an arena where the state and regions through direct contact can build better cooperation.
Let us jointly create forms for long-term control and financing of health care that takes us out of the permanent crisis, to a normal state that is actually normal.
