A Review Of The Public Healthcare System In Saudi Arabia

Abstract

This paper aims to review the past, present, and future public healthcare system and how well the current healthcare system was able to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia. Google Scholar and Google were searched using appropriate search terms. The collected papers were screened and selected to arrive at the final number of reviewed here. With small variations in the year of certain development, the historical development of the healthcare system in Saudi Arabia is clear. With the arrival of the modern treatment system alongside the significant oil revenues, the country could adopt an all-around strategy for the comprehensive development of its healthcare system. The current status of the Saudi healthcare system consists of a mixture of earlier trends and new technologies for remote care and self-management of chronic problems by patients themselves. The absence of standards makes it difficult to compare Saudi healthcare reforms with those in advanced countries and compare the Saudi systems in different periods. Modern trends are primarily driven by technological advances for remote healthcare, self-management of chronic problems by patients themselves, and increasing accessibility and affordability. Weaknesses in the current public healthcare system have prompted privatisation. To achieve the healthcare goals of Saudi Vision 2030, large funding is required, and the government is not in a position to invest adequate funds in this sector. Hence, PPP or other privatisation have been proposed and are being implemented as a par[1]t of Saudi Vision 2030. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, the Saudi healthcare system implemented several timely and proactive strategies to contain and reduce new cases. There has been much success in this respect, with only around 500 new cases reported daily. The limitations on the availability of appropriate papers and the difficulty of cross-paper analyses due to different methods of expression of results were two major limitations of this review.