In order to explain informal payments in public health care services in Romania, this paper evaluates the relationship between extra payments or valuable gifts (apart from official fees) and the level of tolerance to corruption, as well as the socio-economic and spatial patterns across those individuals offering informal payments. To evaluate this, a survey undertaken in 2013 is reported. Using logistic regression analysis, the findings are that patients with a high tolerance to corruption, high socio-economic risk (those divorced, separated, or with other form of marital status, and those not working), and located in rural or less affluent areas are more likely to offer (apart from official fees) extra payments or valuable gifts for health care services. The paper concludes by discussing the health policy implications.

Background: Chronic diseases are major causes of morbidity and mortality in developed countries. Their effects can be mitigated by high quality evidence-based care, but this is not the norm in most systems. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an evidence-based policy response to this practice gap, which uses multiple strategies to promote the quality of chronic care.

Neglected and tropical diseases, pervasive in developing countries, are important contributors to global health inequalities. They remain largely untreated due to lack of effective and affordable treatments. Resource-poor countries cannot afford to develop the public health interventions needed to control neglected diseases. In addition, neglected diseases do not represent an attractive market for pharmaceutical industry. Although a number of international commitments, stated in the Millennium Development Goals, have been made to avert the risk of communicable diseases, tropical diseases still remain neglected due to delays in international assistance. This delay can be explained by the form international cooperation has generally taken, which is limited to promoting countries’ national interests, rather than social justice at a global level. This restricts the international responsibility for global inequalities in health to a humanitarian assistance.We propose an alternative view, arguing that expanding the scope of international cooperation by promoting shared health and economic value at a global level will create new opportunities for innovative, effective and affordable interventions worldwide. It will also promote neglected diseases as a global research priority. We build our argument on a proposal to replace the patenting system that currently regulates pharmaceutical research with a global fund to reward this research based on actual decreases in morbidity and mortality at a global level. We argue that this approach is beneficent because it will decrease global health inequalities and promote social justice worldwide.

Healthcare accessibility and equity remain important issues, as corruption in the form of informal payments is still prevalent in many countries across the world. This study employs a panel data analysis over the 2006–2013 period to explore the role of different institutional factors in explaining the prevalence of informal payments. Covering 117 countries, our findings confirm the significant role of both formal and informal institutions. Good governance, a higher trust among individuals, and a higher commitment to tackling corruption are associated with diminishing informal payments. In addition, higher shares of private finance, such as out-of-pocket and domestic private health expenditure, are also correlated with a lower prevalence of informal payments. In policy terms, this displays how correcting institutional imperfections may be among the most efficient ways to tackle informal payments in healthcare.

Little research has been done on professionals’ perceptions of institutions and governments during epidemics. We aim to create a profile of physicians who feel they can raise public health issues with relevant institutions during a pandemic. A total of 1285 Romanian physicians completed an online survey as part of a larger study. We used binary logistic regression to profile physicians who felt they were able to raise public health issues with relevant institutions. Five predictors could differentiate between respondents who tended to agree with the trust statement and those who tended to disagree: feeling safe at work during the pandemic, considering the financial incentive worth the risk, receiving training on the use of protective equipment, having the same values as colleagues, and enjoying work as much as before the pandemic. Physicians who trusted the system to raise public health issues with the appropriate institutions were more likely to feel that they shared the same values as their colleagues, to say they were trained to use protective equipment during the pandemic, to feel that they were safe at work during the pandemic, to enjoy their work as much as before the pandemic, and to feel that the financial bonus justified the risk.