Jump to content

Talk:Healthcare in Italy/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Intramoenia practice

Following a 2007 law (http://www.salute.gov.it/dettaglio/dettaglioNews.jsp?id=937), specialist doctors working for the SSN can choose a part-time contract, where they to spend some of their worktime (at least 50%) on care paid by the SSN, and the rest as free agents, curing patients that pay out-of-pocket. In the free profession part they may use the facilities provided by the public hospital (hence the name intra-moenia, which is a Latin phrase meaning "between the walls"). Their price rate is subject to approval by the hospital.--StefanoC (talk) 12:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Does this mean that the doctor pays the hospital for the use of the hospital facilities? Or does the patient pay the hospital? Or are the hospitals' services free to those electing to use doctors services as free agents? It's unclear to me.--Hauskalainen (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure; I think the doctors pay, in the sense that in the contract they accept to work the "public" part of their time at what are (presumably) lower than market rates. In exchange, they can use hospital facilities for the "private" part of their practice. The patient doesn't pay directly to the doctor, but at the hospital cashier (at the rate fixed by the doctor); the money should go to the doctor's account, but perhaps the hospital retains some amount for the use of its facilities.--StefanoC (talk) 08:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Another advantage of the intramoenia "free" practice is that the patient can choose the doctor. In the SSN-paid case, the patient is assigned to the first available doctor. --StefanoC (talk) 11:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Other concurrence-enabling provisions

SSN health care is administered at regional level. Each regional public health administration receives from the State a fixed amount per residing citizen. If the region of residence is not able to offer some kind of care (either in public or convetioned private hospitals), the citizen can access care in other regions, and the relative cost is charged to the citizen's region of origin. --StefanoC (talk) 11:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: citation required on waiting times

I searched a little, but wasn't able to find anything but some anecdotical evidence (all on the side of longer waiting times for the public option). ISTAT (the national statistics institute) doesn't seem to collect waiting time data. Moreover, the current system has been used only a few years. StefanoC (talk) 12:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll leave the citation request in place. Maybe someone else will find something. Presumably waiting times are not very different in one sector to the other or else it would be a big political issue with the press full of stories about it.--Hauskalainen (talk) 13:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
It's not much of a political issue. It's a trade-off: there is a cheap, "public" option with a little longer waiting times, not so long as to cause too much inconvenience, and a slightly more expensive, "private" option, with shorter times. One is cheap enough and universal enough to appease the liberal wing, the other is fast enough to appease the free-market wing. Note that I put "private" and "public" in scare quotes: sometimes the "private" option is provided in a public hospital (so-called intramoenia private practice), sometimes the "public" option is provided by a for-profit clinic conventioned with the SSN. StefanoC (talk) 11:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Old references

The ranking numbers refer to numbers that are over a decade old. Shouldn't the wording be changed so that it does not appear to represent a current situation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.252.219.136 (talk) 15:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Waiting times

While generally correct, the statement on the waiting times is not accurate, since the physician, by evaluating the patient's situation risks, can set the priority ("classe di priorità") of the visit and/or the diagnostic test: "urgent", which means the patient undergoes requested treatment/visit/test within 24 hours, "short time" (breve), with a maximum waiting of up to 7/10 days, and so on. As an example, here's the link to Piedmontese healthcare system: http://www.regione.piemonte.it/sanita/cms2/guida-al-servizio-sanitario/cure-sul-territorio/612-classi-di-priorita-e-tempi-dattesa Best,

C. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.40.12.12 (talk) 00:26, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done in précised form: the text added was "the referring doctor can shorten the waiting times of the more urgent cases by prioritising them" along with the reference. Polly Tunnel (talk) 13:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Healthcare in Italy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

The 2019 Ranking

At the time of writing, the third sentence of this article is: 

  "In 2019, Italy's healthcare system was regarded, by World Health Organization's ranking, as the 2nd best in the world after France."

Yet WHO hasn't released a ranking since 2000, to be found - at who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf - online and as listed in, for example, Wikipedia's article: World Health Organization ranking of health systems in 2000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.208.77 (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Healthcare_in_Italy/Archive_1&oldid=1245384814"