A critical juncture in universal healthcare: insights from South Korea’s COVID-19 experience for the United Kingdom to consider

Abstract

Universal healthcare systems have undergone a severe stress test in the form of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. With respect to the system-embedded allocation of decision-making powers and responsibilities among actors, different modalities have been revealed in the COVID-19 responses of South Korea and the UK, respectively. This article compares and analyzes how these two countries’ healthcare systems have reacted to COVID-19. Although both have implemented similar responsive measures, the UK has recorded a higher number of confirmed cases per thousand people and a higher death rate. Based on the analysis on which this paper is built, the key differences between the two systems are the UK system’s lack of: (1) appropriate medical equipment and technologies along with the human resources; and (2) flexible policy options to incentivize healthcare providers and induce cooperation from the public in a time of national crisis. The UK’s healthcare system is now approaching a critical juncture. The expansion of internal competition, which was introduced to the system in 1991, can serve as means of initiating a resolution to the above-mentioned issues and further reform its system. Under the UK government’s close supervision and precise control, allowing non-reimbursable special medical treatment in the system and widening public choice of medical services would be a suitable policy approach promoting internal competition while at the same time maintaining the UK’s devotion to universal healthcare. The underlying implication of internal competition though is the sharing of decision-making powers and responsibilities with societal and private sectors by inducing and facilitating participation at all levels. Fighting against COVID-19 however is widely considered ‘all-out-war.’ Under the UK government’s supervision and control, it is time for society to step up and fight the pandemic together.

Work stress and perceived organisational support on young Korean nurses’ care for COVID-19 patients

“…This secondary analysis used data were obtained using convenience sampling, between August and October 2020, from 232 nurses ( Heo et al, 2021 ) working in seven COVID-19 hospitals, as designated by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. The parent study ( Heo et al, 2021 )’s inclusion and exclusion criteria were as below: “nurses with prior experience in providing care for patients confirmed or suspected to have COVID-19 were considered, while nurse managers who did not directly provide patient care and nurses with a clinical career of fewer than six months were excluded from the study”. In this current study, data on 211 younger (≤35 years old) nurses ( World Health Organization, 2021 ) were included for analysis, and that on 21 nurses (>35 years old) were excluded.…”

“…Similar to many countries, the Korean healthcare system has experienced challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic ( Heo et al, 2021 ), with a significant impact on healthcare institutions, requiring more frontline healthcare providers and increased work capacity ( Liu et al, 2020 ). As burdens on overextended healthcare systems intensified and the pandemic prolonged, healthcare providers increasingly struggled because of high intensity demands and mental health issues, including depression and burnout ( Kakemam et al, 2021 ; Lee et al, 2021 ; Wang et al, 2020 ).…”

“…The number of active nurses in South Korea is extremely low compared with other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries ( Lee, 2019 ). As there are not enough nurses to provide care for patients, the ratio of nurses to patients is skewed ( Kang & Shin, 2020 ), and COVID-19 has doubled the required number of nurses ( Heo et al, 2021 ). Thus, the retention of nurses has become increasingly crucial in South Korea ( Loerzel et al, 2021 ; Modaresnezhad et al, 2020 ).…”

Eight-Month Follow-up After the Third Dose of BNT162b2 Vaccine in Healthcare Workers: The Question of a Fourth Dose

“…However, universal application of these guidelines to countries with different healthcare systems can be impractical and inefficient. 25 As suggested by Cohen et al, 6 a fourth dose of vaccine for HCWs may prevent the decline in the effectiveness of the third dose and further outbreaks, thereby contributing to sustainable functioning of healthcare systems during the pandemic. From this point of view, the healthcare system has not been substantially disrupted by the pandemic thus far, and hybrid immunity has demonstrated its enduring protective effect; thus, it would be undesirable to recommend a fourth dose to all HCWs in South Korea.…”