Background
Alongside rapid economic development, the health status of people in Vietnam has significantly improved in recent years, with the life expectancy at birth increasing from 71 years in 1990 to 76 years in 2015 [
1]. Infant mortality rates (under 5 years of age) decreased from 58 deaths per 1000 live births in 1990 to 18 in 2015 [
2]; and the proportion of under-five-year-olds who were underweight decreased from 37% in 1993 to 14% in 2015 [
3,
4]. However, wide disparities remain in core health indicators between rural and urban residents, across different regions, and among population groups [
4]. Disease patterns in contemporary Vietnam are changing, with the main societal health problems shifting from maternal and child care and infectious diseases to non-communicable diseases and traffic-related injuries [
5]. Vietnam also has one of the most rapidly aging populations in the world [
6,
7], with an increasing demand for quality healthcare services and new issues likely to emerge in the health sector in future years [
4]. The country’s government is now being forced to consider not only a plan for developing healthcare manpower and improving health infrastructure such as facilities and equipment, but also for better management of limited healthcare resources and reforming health financing to improve overall efficiency [
4].
The healthcare workforce in Vietnam is currently insufficient to meet manpower norms and practical needs [
4], with the number of physicians in 2015 (around eight per 10,000 population) [
4] being quite low when compared to other countries in Southeast Asia [
8]. Healthcare resources should be appropriately distributed to meet needs [
9], but there is currently an imbalanced distribution of human resources and a shortage of manpower in Vietnam, especially of highly specialized physicians in fields such as cancer, palliative care, and mental health [
10,
11]. Mountainous and remote areas have severe shortages of healthcare workers [
12], with the number of physicians per population in the North West, Central Highland, and Mekong Delta Regions being lower than the national average [
4]. Most healthcare workers in remote areas manage with a shortage of medical equipment and training. They have limited opportunities to use advanced diagnosis and treatment methods and maintain and improve their professional ability [
4]. The quality of healthcare services is therefore lower in remote areas than more urban regions.
Healthcare facilities in Vietnam are divided into four levels by administrative structure: central (Level I); provincial (Level II), covering a population of 1–2 million; district (Level III), covering 100,000–200,000; and commune (Level IV), covering around 5000–10,000 [
13]. This structure is set out in Article 81 of Chapter VIII of the 2009 Law on Examination and Treatment [
6], which covers the organizational system of medical examination and treatment establishments. Level I hospitals include central hospitals owned by the Ministry of Health and city hospitals owned by municipalities such as Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh City. Level II, III, and IV hospitals are owned by local provincial governments, such as the people’s committee responsible for allocating finance and human resources. The provincial or district health department is responsible for their professional management under the Vietnamese Ministry of Health.
The healthcare system has a mixture of public and private provision. The number of private hospitals is increasing, but as of 2014, only 6% of all healthcare facilities were privately owned [
14]. Private hospitals, however, now provide more than 60% of outpatient services and have become an important component of the national health system [
15]. A health insurance system was introduced in 1993, and the government has made a considerable effort to achieve universal coverage, reaching 77% of the population in 2015 [
4]. Recently, the government has announced a target of 90% health insurance coverage by 2020 [
16]. Reform of the organizational structure of healthcare at all levels is currently underway, as set out in the master plan for Vietnam’s health system development to 2025 [
4]. The plan explains that having too many facilities can create instability and inconsistency, especially at the grassroots level. It also leads to a shortage of human resources, increased administrative expenditure, and the decreased effectiveness of health services.
Having too many patients in higher level hospitals has become an urgent problem in recent years, with two to three patients sharing a bed becoming common in many central and provincial hospitals [
17]. Bed occupancy rates have reached 120–160%, especially in the central hospitals of some large cities [
4]. Overcrowding in higher level healthcare facilities may have several causes, including limited healthcare quality in lower level facilities in districts and communes, and even in provincial hospitals; increasing expectations of service quality; improvement in convenience of transportation from remote areas to central areas; and limited differences in hospital fees at different administrative levels [
13]. This may lead to a drain on resources in higher level hospitals and subsequent wastage at lower levels. If the current situation is not improved, this situation will eventually result in major inefficiencies across the entire Vietnamese health care system.
The Ministry of Health in Vietnam has managed healthcare provision through a system known as the
Direction of Healthcare Activities (DOHA) since 1961 [
18]. This system requires health facilities at higher administrative levels to support those at lower levels to enable them to deliver medical services for local communities in primary care settings. The contents of DOHA have been modified and adjusted over time based on the need for medical care, but the word “DOHA” has been retained in the context of medical care reform [
18]. DOHA currently focuses on reducing the burden on higher level hospitals, particularly central hospitals, which still have too many patients seeking health care. The healthcare system in Vietnam is not well known outside the country and information regarding DOHA is rarely available in English, and as such, the aim of this article was to review the health reform process through the DOHA scheme in contemporary Vietnam.
Discussion
We reviewed the health reform process through DOHA in Vietnam. Within the framework of DOHA, there have been various activities and regulatory interventions over the past 50 years. To continue the improvement of the quality of care in hospitals, higher level of hospitals could take initiatives for technical transfer to lower level hospitals via the regulatory framework.
There have also been additional advantages of DOHA. It has, for example, improved the relationships between higher and lower level hospitals by promoting mutual understanding among staff. This will facilitate communication about patients and help to avoid unnecessary transfers. Collaboration among different level hospitals is part of DOHA’s mission [
18]. DOHA also encouraged district and provincial hospitals to look at their own hospital services more critically and start thinking about how to improve the health service and provide more patient-centered care, as well as focusing on investment in applying new medical technologies themselves, through DOHA’s technical transfer program [
18].
A limitation of DOHA has been difficulties in identifying the impact of DOHA activities. Various other factors, such as economic and infrastructural development, may have led to an increase in demand for sophisticated medical care and subsequent improvements in access to higher level hospitals. Despite DOHA’s effort, it may be difficult to expect an immediate reduction in the number of patients being referred to higher level hospitals, as shown in Table
3. However, monitoring the number of patients being referred to higher level hospitals will be necessary to help plan which areas of clinical training should be undertaken through DOHA.
Although DOHA includes technical transfer training for medical doctors, training for managers and other healthcare providers should also be expanded. It was previously considered that nursing practice is simple enough for each provincial hospital to improve the quality of nursing by themselves. However, in order to deliver high-quality patient-centered care, all health professionals should be educated as members of an interdisciplinary team with professional communication and team collaboration. Training programs in patient safety, infection control, and nursing management (issues which are relatively recent in Vietnam) have now been conducted through DOHA and have included nurses and other health care workers. In the future, DOHA is expected to place more emphasis on these issues and provide greater opportunities to share good practice in Vietnamese healthcare.