Nonfinancial barriers to healthcare access 

We discussed the definition of benchmark formerly and what the best approach for analysis and reform policy identification. As we know now that the benchmark is the measurement of improvement and progress indicator than threshold of reforms. In our series about reform benchmarks and associated indicators is really useful to highlight a bit over the matter of access which was the first post of this blog. Matter of access is one word but indeed represented to the first mirror of the healthcare system everywhere; it means when someone able to enter the healthcare system smoothly and elegantly without inconveniences. That reflects how far this system well designed and much coherent to the core role of medical value delivery. Also matter of system accessibility subjected to many other parameters indirectly related to the end user values such as tradition and local community customs. In some country level of web use is limited to certain nature of work and public organization; in that case when I talk about mobile app for diagnosis and mobile data entry never make sense with society traditions and behavioural lifestyle. 

Some researchers defined the local community culture and work traditions as a source of medical care success and others top them on the peak of work move and improvements. To get my idea in simple way imagine some investors would like to sell winter  blankets in tropical countries than air condition, you can imagine the result depending on the same concept with healthcare systems. Put the matter of society traditions as a matter of priority to describe the key of medical care success with any system model wanted to be applied. In coming paragraph we will reveal third benchmark in our series regarding the matter of healthcare access suited and adaptable to numerous community segments and suited also to different strategic policy of medical values. There is hint here describe and summarize the coming Benchmark; the core of work depends mainly on addressing the poor distribution of drugs, supplies and facilities as follow:

1. Reduction of geographical mal-distribution

Family and services

Personnel (mix and training)

 Supplies

Drugs

Clinic hours (appropriate to village routines, work schedules)

Transportation for medical purposes

2. Gender

Status in family regarding decision-making

Mobility

Access to resources

Reproductive autonomy

Gender sensitive provision of services, involvement of community political groups to address gender barriers

3. Cultural

Language

Attitude and practices relevant to disease and health

Uninformed reliance on untrained traditional practitioners (some healers, midwives, dentists, pharmacists)

Perception of public sector quality

4. Discrimination by race, religion, class, sexual orientation, disease

Include stigmatization of groups receiving public care. Full health J