The U.S. Healthcare System - 7425 Words

The U.S. Healthcare System (Dissertation Sample) Content: THE U.S. HEALTHCARE SYSTEM: PROPOSAL FOR REFORM BASING ON A SOCIAL WELFARE STATE COMPARABLE TO EUROPEAN MODELSName:CourseDate AbstractThe study seeks to propose effective healthcare system changes in the U.S. through comparative considerations with successful healthcare systems in other industrialized countries. Through a literature review, the study undertakes a comparison and contrast of the U.S. healthcare system with the UK, German, French and Canadian systems. The findings indicate that the single payer (UK and Canada) and statutory social insurance (Germany and France) healthcare systems spend less on healthcare, achieve better health outcomes, and universal coverage compared to the multiple payer system in the USA. American culture, entailing higher individualism, small power distances, and low uncertainty avoidance explains the tendency towards the existing capitalistic healthcare system. In contrast, European nations and Canada tend towards a social welfare s tate as manifested in their inclusive healthcare systems. Basing on the comparative analysis, the study recommends a single payer healthcare system accommodating supplementary private insurance. This takes into consideration the need to cut costs, achieve better health outcomes, and balance individualism and social welfare to cater for U.S. healthcare challenges such as public health inequalities and an ageing population. IntroductionHealthcare is an important issue in the contemporary USA, as evidenced by widespread public debate and its central role as a campaign item among candidates in recent and on-going presidential elections. A countrys social welfare policy influences its healthcare system heavily. The differences in the social welfare outlook between the USA and European countries results in divergent forms of healthcare system. Whereas European nations tend towards national insurance, manifested in their single payer healthcare systems, the USA has capitalistic tendencies, manifested in its multiple payer healthcare system. The direction a country adopts in terms of healthcare system influences the well-being of its citizens through determining the costs, affordability, accessibility, quality, and health outcomes. This introductory chapter provides a background on the healthcare systems, the studys significance, and the study aims.Background: Single payer, Multi-payer Healthcare Systems and Universal CoverageThe healthcare system adopted by a country generally falls into single payer or multiple payer considerations. Such systems differ in terms of coverage, funding, and management. A single payer healthcare system is one in which the central government collects funds for healthcare coverage. There are various variants of the single payer healthcare model sharing the centralized collection of funds and provision of coverage. In some countries, the federal government collects funds through taxation or through the state for individuals whose income fa lls below the state poverty line. Further, single payer healthcare systems tend to sell low cost insurance to individuals exempt from income tax or to the uninsured. Other variants of single payer healthcare systems include the decentralized pools for different geographic regions such as states, or the private operated ones with comprehensive regulation and oversight by the government. One of the main strengths of single payer healthcare systems lies in their ability to control overall healthcare expenditure through better control on administrative costs. Further, most countries with single payer healthcare systems tend towards achieving universal coverage. However, the vulnerability of single payer healthcare systems to political influence is a main drawback. Such political influence can result in mismanagement, disarming of cost controls, and the creation of a climate conducive for corruption.A multiple payer healthcare system entails pluralistic coverage, funding, and manageme nt of healthcare in a country. In terms of funding, the multiple payer system entails private insurers, public programs, individuals, employers, and health maintenance organizations. As a result, all these parties are also involved in the management of healthcare in terms of collection of funds, healthcare payouts, cost monitoring, quality monitoring, contracting, educating consumers, and budgeting. The multiple payer healthcare system leads to higher administrative costs than the single payer system due to the several instances of function duplication. On the positive side, multiple payer healthcare systems tend to allow consumer choice in the health insurer market. This may drive competition and innovation leading to better healthcare provision. Both single and multiple payer healthcare systems can achieve universal healthcare coverage. For instance, all countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with the exception of the U.S., Mexico, and Tur key, have achieved universal healthcare coverage with either single or multiple payer systems in place.SignificanceThe importance of healthcare in societies warrants and justifies studies into healthcare systems with the aim of improving effectiveness, health outcomes, and coverage. Further, healthcare expenditure consumes a significant percentage of the GDP in the U.S., calling for investigations into how to manage such costs. The cost management aspect creates an economic case for the current study. A political case arises from the central role of healthcare debates in U.S. electioneering, influencing perceptions on the performance of the government and a significant bearing on formation of the next government. Demographic shifts in the U.S. towards an older median age translate to more healthcare needs and challenges into the future, generating a social case for the current study. Aims and ObjectivesThe aim of the study is to generate effective healthcare system changes in the U .S. through comparative considerations with successful healthcare systems in other industrialized countries. To this end, the following objectives will guide the study:To review literature on the healthcare system in the U.S. and other industrialized countries (the UK, Germany, France, and Canada).To compare the healthcare systems, health outcomes, and costs of the multi-payer coverage system in the U.S. and single payer or social coverage in other industrialized countries.To compare and contrast the cultural differences between the U.S. and other industrialized countries, using the cultural difference conception to explain their contrasting outlooks towards social welfare in healthcare.To recommend changes to the current U.S. healthcare system based on the literature review and the discussion.OverviewThe current chapter introduces the topic and provides a background to place the study into context. A political, economic, and social case for study is provided to indicate the signifi cance of undertaking the study. The aims and objectives section refines the purpose of the study. The subsequent sections will entail data collection through a review of literature. The scope of the literature will entail comparative inquiries into the healthcare systems in the U.S., UK, Germany, France, and Canada. Here, the literature covers several aspects including healthcare outcomes, costs, universal coverage, cultural differences, and inclinations to social welfare. An overview of the literature review then ushers the discussion, analyzing possible options for U.S. healthcare reforms based on the comparative healthcare systems in other industrialized. This then leads to a conclusion and a set of recommendations for healthcare system changes in the U.S. Literature ReviewThis literature review first describes the different forms of single payer healthcare systems in the UK, Germany, France and Canada, alongside a section on the cultural differences between each country and the USA. The study then describes the multiple payer healthcare system in the USA. The next section of the literature review analyzes the differences between the single-payer and multiple payer healthcares systems, first in terms of health outcomes, followed by cost considerations. The healthcare systems are then related to the countries social welfare inclinations.Single Payer Healthcare Systems: The UKThe UK offers a universal healthcare insurance coverage system funded through taxes. The government contracts with various healthcare providers on behalf of the people. The UK government, through the National Health Service (NHS), provides global budgets to district health authorities, which then determine and prioritize healthcare needs. Each district health authority is responsible for about 300,000 people, for whom the authority purchases the necessary healthcare services. The UK central government directly administers the NHS, which translates to the governments specifications of th e budget and capital distributed to the regional health authorities. Through the fully nationalized NHS, the government also determines the expenditure on drugs by influencing the budget provided for every practitioner. In terms of organization, regional offices exist above the UK health authorities, with both remaining subordinate to the central government. The Department of Health represents the central government in this organization, with a cabinet minister reporting to the Prime Minister on health matters. Financing of the health authorities relies on population considerations. However, the government adjusts the total spending to reflect age and mortality considerations. Importantly, the UK still bears private healthcare, albeit dominated by the nationalized system in overall healthcare delivery. The 12% of the population insured privately reflects the extent to which the nationalized he... The U.S. Healthcare System - 7425 Words The U.S. Healthcare System (Dissertation Sample) Content: THE U.S. HEALTHCARE SYSTEM: PROPOSAL FOR REFORM BASING ON A SOCIAL WELFARE STATE COMPARABLE TO EUROPEAN MODELSName:CourseDate AbstractThe study seeks to propose effective healthcare system changes in the U.S. through comparative considerations with successful healthcare systems in other industrialized countries. Through a literature review, the study undertakes a comparison and contrast of the U.S. healthcare system with the UK, German, French and Canadian systems. The findings indicate that the single payer (UK and Canada) and statutory social insurance (Germany and France) healthcare systems spend less on healthcare, achieve better health outcomes, and universal coverage compared to the multiple payer system in the USA. American culture, entailing higher individualism, small power distances, and low uncertainty avoidance explains the tendency towards the existing capitalistic healthcare system. In contrast, European nations and Canada tend towards a social welfare s tate as manifested in their inclusive healthcare systems. Basing on the comparative analysis, the study recommends a single payer healthcare system accommodating supplementary private insurance. This takes into consideration the need to cut costs, achieve better health outcomes, and balance individualism and social welfare to cater for U.S. healthcare challenges such as public health inequalities and an ageing population. IntroductionHealthcare is an important issue in the contemporary USA, as evidenced by widespread public debate and its central role as a campaign item among candidates in recent and on-going presidential elections. A countrys social welfare policy influences its healthcare system heavily. The differences in the social welfare outlook between the USA and European countries results in divergent forms of healthcare system. Whereas European nations tend towards national insurance, manifested in their single payer healthcare systems, the USA has capitalistic tendencies, manifested in its multiple payer healthcare system. The direction a country adopts in terms of healthcare system influences the well-being of its citizens through determining the costs, affordability, accessibility, quality, and health outcomes. This introductory chapter provides a background on the healthcare systems, the studys significance, and the study aims.Background: Single payer, Multi-payer Healthcare Systems and Universal CoverageThe healthcare system adopted by a country generally falls into single payer or multiple payer considerations. Such systems differ in terms of coverage, funding, and management. A single payer healthcare system is one in which the central government collects funds for healthcare coverage. There are various variants of the single payer healthcare model sharing the centralized collection of funds and provision of coverage. In some countries, the federal government collects funds through taxation or through the state for individuals whose income fa lls below the state poverty line. Further, single payer healthcare systems tend to sell low cost insurance to individuals exempt from income tax or to the uninsured. Other variants of single payer healthcare systems include the decentralized pools for different geographic regions such as states, or the private operated ones with comprehensive regulation and oversight by the government. One of the main strengths of single payer healthcare systems lies in their ability to control overall healthcare expenditure through better control on administrative costs. Further, most countries with single payer healthcare systems tend towards achieving universal coverage. However, the vulnerability of single payer healthcare systems to political influence is a main drawback. Such political influence can result in mismanagement, disarming of cost controls, and the creation of a climate conducive for corruption.A multiple payer healthcare system entails pluralistic coverage, funding, and manageme nt of healthcare in a country. In terms of funding, the multiple payer system entails private insurers, public programs, individuals, employers, and health maintenance organizations. As a result, all these parties are also involved in the management of healthcare in terms of collection of funds, healthcare payouts, cost monitoring, quality monitoring, contracting, educating consumers, and budgeting. The multiple payer healthcare system leads to higher administrative costs than the single payer system due to the several instances of function duplication. On the positive side, multiple payer healthcare systems tend to allow consumer choice in the health insurer market. This may drive competition and innovation leading to better healthcare provision. Both single and multiple payer healthcare systems can achieve universal healthcare coverage. For instance, all countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with the exception of the U.S., Mexico, and Tur key, have achieved universal healthcare coverage with either single or multiple payer systems in place.SignificanceThe importance of healthcare in societies warrants and justifies studies into healthcare systems with the aim of improving effectiveness, health outcomes, and coverage. Further, healthcare expenditure consumes a significant percentage of the GDP in the U.S., calling for investigations into how to manage such costs. The cost management aspect creates an economic case for the current study. A political case arises from the central role of healthcare debates in U.S. electioneering, influencing perceptions on the performance of the government and a significant bearing on formation of the next government. Demographic shifts in the U.S. towards an older median age translate to more healthcare needs and challenges into the future, generating a social case for the current study. Aims and ObjectivesThe aim of the study is to generate effective healthcare system changes in the U .S. through comparative considerations with successful healthcare systems in other industrialized countries. To this end, the following objectives will guide the study:To review literature on the healthcare system in the U.S. and other industrialized countries (the UK, Germany, France, and Canada).To compare the healthcare systems, health outcomes, and costs of the multi-payer coverage system in the U.S. and single payer or social coverage in other industrialized countries.To compare and contrast the cultural differences between the U.S. and other industrialized countries, using the cultural difference conception to explain their contrasting outlooks towards social welfare in healthcare.To recommend changes to the current U.S. healthcare system based on the literature review and the discussion.OverviewThe current chapter introduces the topic and provides a background to place the study into context. A political, economic, and social case for study is provided to indicate the signifi cance of undertaking the study. The aims and objectives section refines the purpose of the study. The subsequent sections will entail data collection through a review of literature. The scope of the literature will entail comparative inquiries into the healthcare systems in the U.S., UK, Germany, France, and Canada. Here, the literature covers several aspects including healthcare outcomes, costs, universal coverage, cultural differences, and inclinations to social welfare. An overview of the literature review then ushers the discussion, analyzing possible options for U.S. healthcare reforms based on the comparative healthcare systems in other industrialized. This then leads to a conclusion and a set of recommendations for healthcare system changes in the U.S. Literature ReviewThis literature review first describes the different forms of single payer healthcare systems in the UK, Germany, France and Canada, alongside a section on the cultural differences between each country and the USA. The study then describes the multiple payer healthcare system in the USA. The next section of the literature review analyzes the differences between the single-payer and multiple payer healthcares systems, first in terms of health outcomes, followed by cost considerations. The healthcare systems are then related to the countries social welfare inclinations.Single Payer Healthcare Systems: The UKThe UK offers a universal healthcare insurance coverage system funded through taxes. The government contracts with various healthcare providers on behalf of the people. The UK government, through the National Health Service (NHS), provides global budgets to district health authorities, which then determine and prioritize healthcare needs. Each district health authority is responsible for about 300,000 people, for whom the authority purchases the necessary healthcare services. The UK central government directly administers the NHS, which translates to the governments specifications of th e budget and capital distributed to the regional health authorities. Through the fully nationalized NHS, the government also determines the expenditure on drugs by influencing the budget provided for every practitioner. In terms of organization, regional offices exist above the UK health authorities, with both remaining subordinate to the central government. The Department of Health represents the central government in this organization, with a cabinet minister reporting to the Prime Minister on health matters. Financing of the health authorities relies on population considerations. However, the government adjusts the total spending to reflect age and mortality considerations. Importantly, the UK still bears private healthcare, albeit dominated by the nationalized system in overall healthcare delivery. The 12% of the population insured privately reflects the extent to which the nationalized he...