PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10247171

Dawson Report: design for the future...

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Memorandum on Designs for Health Centres, printed as an appendix to the Dawson Report, described three types of health centre, of steadily increasing size and complexity. We print here the description and plans for Type 1, the simplest. The plans, drawn for the consultative council by an architect, C. H. Biddulph-Pinchard, were not intended to be used as standardised models, but as suggestions to be modified in the light of local conditions and the peculiarities of the site. Health Centre Type 2 was intended to serve a small town, or a group of small towns or villages, and had twice the number of beds as well as more elaborate facilities generally. Type 3 was very grand, including a ward block with up to 66 beds and accommodation for 35 staff.

Explore related subjects

Community Health CentersFacility Design and ConstructionUnited KingdomJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

1980-05-16. Dawson Report: design for the future.... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10247171/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

The impact of micro health insurance on Rwandan health centre costs.

While the implications of payment mechanisms for provider behaviour and cost have been amply explored in industrialized countries, there is little empirical evidence from developing countries. This study exploits the opportunities created by a pilot study of micro health insurance with capitation in Rwanda to address this issue. Using cross-sectional data collected in 52 health centres, the paper employs an econometric cost function with payer-specific outputs to assess the cost impact of two provider payment mechanisms: (1) user fees for care paid by the uninsured, and (2) capitation payment paid by informal insurance schemes for the insured. The cost function allows payer-specific marginal and average costs and scale measures to be calculated. Findings point to significant differences in cost between the two payment forms. These may be due to the incentives embodied in the capitation provider payment or the less severe case-mix among insured patients arising from improved access to care for this group, or both. For both payment types there are important short-run economies of scale, which could be exploited through more intensive use of idle resources in health centres.

Community Health Centers↗