Comparison between health indicators

Running head: HEALTHCARE
Comparison between health indicators
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1HEALTHCARE
Introduction- Also referred to as health system, healthcare system is an umbrella term
that refers to the organization of institutions, people, and resources that are responsible for the
delivery of healthcare services, with the aim of meeting the healthcare needs and demands of
a target population. The functioning of healthcare system is multifaceted and is generally
thought to be the sum total of the resources and institutions. The chief objective of healthcare
system is to enhance the overall outcomes, despite the lack of adequate resources. In addition,
recognition of unassuming, comprehensible and real-world health interventions is
accommodating in addressing the existing gap in healthcare facilities of different nations,
which in turn helps in improving health outcomes and wellbeing (Schütte, Acevedo &
Flahault, 2018). According to reports published by the World Health Organisation (2019)
Bangladesh’s healthcare system is reliant on four major components namely, administration,
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), private sector, and donor agencies. Furthermore,
despite the presence of sufficient healthcare infrastructure, the clinics and hospitals in
Bangladesh are not properly provided with necessary medications, health supplies and
manpower (Islam & Biswas, 2014). In contrast, comprehensive healthcare services are
provided by the Department of Health in Australia to a plethora of sectors, concomitant with
proper utilisation and allocation of resources and findings. The essay will contain a
comparative analysis of the healthcare system of Australia and Bangladesh, in relation to a
range of population health indicators, which will facilitate problem recognition and
evaluation.
Funding-
Funding system including health insurance- The principal funding system for
Australia comprises of hospitals that are publicly owned, and affiliated to the state and
territory government of Australia. The Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme and Medicare Benefit
Schedule (MBS) are services provided by the government of Australia, for which it pays

2HEALTHCARE
Medicare rebates, with the aim of providing patients with necessary monetary assistance, in
relation to the expenditure of hospital treatment, medical services, and admission of patients
to private healthcare settings. The government is also responsible for dealing with regulation
and enforcing subsidy in aged care health services, and also takes efforts for providing
assistance to ensure efficacy and high quality primary care amenities (Australian Government
Department of Health, 2019). In contrast, healthcare funding in Bangladesh is manifested by
a progressively high out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditures, and, non-appearance of active
payment system. Furthermore, OOP payments in Bangladesh for private health expenditure
are 92.9%, which is much higher than 79.9% for Nepal and 89.2% for India. Furthermore,
household OOP expenditure has been identified as the principle source of healthcare funding
and has increased from 56.9-63.3% (1997-2012) of the total health expenditure (THE).
Moreover, the government is the second largest funding agent and contributes to an estimated
26.0% of the expenditure (Molla & Chi, 2017).
% GDP spent on health- Reports from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
suggests that an estimated GDP for $161.6 billion had been spent by the Australian
government for healthcare services and facilities during 2014-2015 time period. This amount
was comparatively higher than $4.4 billion GDP that had been allocated by the government
for healthcare facilities during 2013-2014 (AIHW, 2016). This is in huge contrast to the fact
that Bangladesh had a health expenditure of 2.03% GDP in 2014, and the highest GDP value
over the past two decades has been 2.11%, which was spent by the government on healthcare
in 2011, with 1.28% being the lowest spent in the year 1997. Furthermore, public health
expenditure by the government of Bangladesh was 5.66% in 2014, with the highest
percentage being 9.20% spent in 1999, and lowest being 5.55% spent in the year 2013 (Index
Mundi, 2018).

3HEALTHCARE
2014
2.3
2.11
% GDP spent on health
Australia Bangladesh
Graph 1- % GDP spent on health
System governance arrangements in the country- The Government of Bangladesh
comprises of three branches namely, the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the
judicial branch. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is charged with the responsibility
of framing healthcare policies in Bangladesh and is also held accountable for different types
of government health programs that focus on the domain of family planning. This ministry
comprises of two major divisions namely, Family Welfare Division and Health Service
Division. Some of the major departments under these divisions are namely, Bangladesh
National Nutrition Council, Department of Drug Administration, Health Economics Unit,
Bangladesh Institute of Child and Mother Health, Directorate General of Nursing and
Midwifery, and National Institute of Population Research and Training. This is in contrast to
the fact that the governance and coordination of the healthcare services existing in Australia
are complex, and the duties are shared by different domains of the government. In addition,
private and public sectors together take efforts for formulating and allocating the health
resources. Public healthcare amenities are generally delivered by the state, local and territory

4HEALTHCARE
government. However, hospitals and private medical practitioners are controlled by the
private sector. As per reports, the government had spent roughly 2-3rd of the total $155 billion
for healthcare services in 2013-2014. The Department of Health in Australia has the authority
to oversee the operating of the healthcare system, in addition to ensuring affordable access to
treatments and facilities, hospital services, and assisting people to remain healthy. The
Secretary is the head of the department and directly reports to the Minister for Regional
Services, Sport, Local Government and Decentralisation and the Minister for Health.
Population health indicators
Maternal mortality rates- Also known as maternal death, maternal mortality refers to
death of a woman who is pregnant, or within 42 days from the termination of her pregnancy,
notwithstanding the duration of pregnancy or its site. When a comparison was done regarding
maternal mortality rates in Australia and Bangladesh, it was found that 176 deaths occurred
in Bangladesh, per 100,000 live births in the year 2015. This demonstrates a significant
decrease from previous rates of 240 and 340 deaths that occurred in 2010 and 2008,
respectively, thus suggesting that efforts are being taken by the Bangladesh government for
enhancing the health of pregnant mothers, and those who have immediately delivered infants
(Index Mundi, 2018). However, the MMR rates obtained from the Bangladesh Maternal
Mortality and Health Care Survey (BMMS) is 196 deaths per 100,000 live births, in 2016,
which in turn accredited to the increased prevalence of eclampsia and haemorrhage, account
for more than 55% of the death rates (NIPORT, 2017). There were 6 deaths in 2015 in
Australia, per 100,000 live births, thus providing evidence for a well-developed maternity
care system.

5HEALTHCARE
2015
6
176
Maternal mortality rates
Australia Bangladesh
Graph 2- Maternal mortality rates
Infant mortality rates- The term infant mortality refers to death of infants who are
aged less than one year. Also referred to as IMR, the term comprises of the total number of
deaths that occur per 1,000 live births, and has been identified to be a major consequence of
preterm birth among children and infants. As per statistical reports, there were an
estimated 31.7 deaths per 1,000 live births in Bangladesh in the year 2017, with 34 deaths
and 29.2 deaths per 1,000 live births occurring among males and females, respectively. In
addition, this percentage is much less than infant mortality rates of the previous years which
were 32.9, 47.3, 52.54, and 59.02 deaths in 2016, 2013, 2010, and 2009, respectively (Index
Mundi, 2018). This is in contrast to the occurrence of roughly 4.3 infant deaths per 100,000
in Australia that accounted for 3.3% in the year 2017, and comprised of 562 males and 457
females. This proportion was an increase by 5.1% from the death that occurred in 2016 (970
deaths) (ABS, 2018). However, taking into consideration reports from the past decade, the
government has been able to substantially decrease the overall infant mortality rate in
Australia. This provides evidence for the fact that the healthcare system in Australia is more