Background/Objectives: This paper brings to light the results of extensive research on the dimension of dental care in Romania in terms of priorities and policies defined at the governmental level for a 25-year period (1999–2023). This research aims to present both individual and ecosystem perspectives on the influence of the way oral health strategies are shaped in Romania. Methods: The data collected are analyzed through the prism of the “iron triangle of healthcare”, focusing on the evolution of dental care from the perspective of the interrelationship of three important components: cost, quality, and access to healthcare services. Results: The paper provides insight and clarity into the context in which the doctor–patient relationship is constructed and developed, as well as a vision of how oral health policies should be designed to meet the individual needs of the patient, which will have an impact on the health and quality of life of the whole community. Conclusions: This study emphasizes the need to reconfigure oral health policies in Romania. Despite some input achievements like a considerable number of dentists, the systemic challenges that developed over these 25 years (such as insufficient funding, the reduced reimbursed procedures, and the limited dentists contracting with NHIH) have significantly contributed to a stagnation or decline of the oral health outcomes at the societal level.

Background: The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire is a widely recognized and used self-reporting instrument designed to measure a person’s satisfaction with various aspects of their job, as well as to provide comparative values regarding general satisfaction and its components. Objective: This study first aimed to test and validate the psychometric properties of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire–Short Form (MSQ-SF). Its second objective was to assess the job satisfaction levels of employees working within the organization and the factors influencing job satisfaction. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study analyzed the responses of 435 hospital staff members using the Romanian version of the MSQ-20 scale. Results: Exploratory Factor Analysis identified a three-factor structure: Task Enrichment, Autonomy Satisfaction, and Supervisory Relationships. The three-factor model with eight MSQ items discarded provided an excellent statistical fit. The MSQ-SF with a 20-item questionnaire has excellent Internal Consistency, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.935, 95% CI (0.926–0.944). Conclusions: The Romanian version of the MSQ-20 has excellent construct validity and consistency, and it provides reliable and comparable data on the health of the workforce.

Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) provide assessments of patients’ subjective experiences and perceptions regarding their interactions with the healthcare system and its services. We present a cross-sectional study of the patient perception and evolution of COVID-19 cases performed at Ovidius Clinical Hospital in Romania during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study objective is to explore the utility and the utilization of PREMs in monitoring patient perceptions of the supplementary protective actions. During the pandemic, the hospital implemented early supplementary protective actions, like PCR and lung CT, to all surgically admitted patients in the hospital alongside government-recommended actions. At the same time, functional PREMs were used to evaluate patient perceptions regarding these supplementary actions. The research was carried out for 19 months between June 2020 and December 2021. The findings revealed that opinions about the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, the personal risk of infection, and the perception of protective actions in the hospital were not correlated. Conclusions: The patients’ appreciation of the COVID-19 protective actions taken by the hospital is related more to the general perceptions induced by the number of cases presented in the mass media and less by perceptions of the gravity of the problem or the risk of infection. In a hospital, the primary mission of patient safety is essential, and it must be fulfilled even if the patients are not sure or fully convinced that this is for their benefit. For management decisions and monitoring, using PREMs can be essential in a situation when general evidence is not conclusive.

Background and Aim: Health technology assessment for drugs is a necessary step in developing health policies that are focused on patients and getting the best value for scarce resources. One important feature of health technology assessment is transparency. In many countries, health technology assessment is followed by negotiations between pharmaceutical companies and health authorities to determine whether a drug will be publicly funded. These negotiations often result in Managed Entry Agreements, which typically include confidentiality clauses covering the final price of the drug. Methods: We reviewed Romanian legislation starting in 2014 to assess the level of confidentiality and transparency in drug pricing and reimbursement. Results: We found that for drugs with Managed Entry Agreements, the level of discounts is confidential, the public does not know how much the government is paying for each of these drugs, the volumes (units) of drugs are not transparently published by the payer, the outcomes, in terms of patients treated by therapeutic area, therapeutic success, and resource utilization, are confidential. Conclusions: We consider that too much confidentiality can prevent the public from knowing if the government is getting good value for money, but too little confidentiality can lead to higher drug prices or a lack of drugs from the market.