The objective of this study is to investigate the healthcare status of South Korea and other member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) using OECD health statistics 2020. We employed the position value for relative comparison index to measure the healthcare status in five following components: demand, supply, accessibility, quality, and cost. The Mann-Kendall test was used to analyze for increasing or decreasing trend of the position value for relative comparison values from 2000 to the recent year. Results showed that Korea was positioned above than the OECD median values in most of components, but lower than the median values in certain indices including healthcare employment, primary care, and mental health care. This study sheds some light on healthcare issues to be improved and the policy-makes can take into account for prior setting process.

This study aims to compare the healthcare status of South Korea and other member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) using the OECD health statistics 2021. We used the position value for relative comparison (PARC) index to measure the five elements of the healthcare system, demand, supply, accessibility, quality, and cost. For the statistical analysis, Mann-Kendall test was performed to examine the trend of the PARC values from 2000 to the most recent year. The results showed that supply, demand, accessibility, and quality were above median than the OECD median and the cost was below median. In sectors such as primary care, health employment and mental health care were below median average. With these result, necessary steps for a sustainable healthcare should be taken into effort by policy makers.

Background: This study aims to measure regional healthcare differences in Korea, and define relatively underserved areas. Methods: We employed position value for relative comparison index (PARC) to measure the healthcare status of 250 areas using 137 indicators in five following domains: healthcare demand, supply, accessibility, service utilization, and outcome. We performed a sensitivity analysis using t-SNE (t-distributed stochastic neighboring embedding). Results: Based on PARC values, 83 areas were defined as relatively underserved areas, 49 of which were categorized as moderate and 34 as severe. The provincial regions with the most underserved areas were Gyeongbuk (16 areas), Gangwon (13), Jeonnam (13), and Gyeongnam (12). Conclusion This study suggests a relative comparison approach to define relatively underserved areas in healthcare. Further studies incorporating various perspectives and methods are required for policy implications.