I agree with you, reading more and more about multi-payer systems, helps me have a clear understanding on why it is important in the U.S community. But I still believe that if the U.S have more preventive system, the cost would be lower due to early prevention or maintain their health. With using multi-payer system, I realized that the systems really help provide quality care. For instance, I use to work for a children hospital, and there were time when we had to transfer patients to other hospital like, Cleveland clinic and many more up scaled hospital that were able to provide better care for are patients, especially are patients with cancer. Even though it is an expensive lateral move, however, the quality of care is remarkable. Unfortunately,
It is generally accepted that the method of payment to physicians affect their professional attitude and behaviour. Consequently, health policy makers manipulate payment system in an attempt to achieve optimal health care for their citizens such as improve accessibility, quality of care, patient’s satisfaction and cost containment. In Ontario, there are a wide range of mechanisms that are used to pay physicians for their services that are funded by both federal and provincial government. According to Canada Health Act annual report (2013), the majority of primary healthcare physicians are funded using the fee for service payment arrangement but of that majority, only less than 30% are compensated exclusively according the fee for service plan. The remaining physicians are funded using one of the following mixed compensation models:
The needs of 30 million additional patients cannot be met by the current system. Many opponents contend that it is not a sustainable answer to the health care crisis in America.
Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) is a group of individual health plans that are intended to provide services for costumers’ that purchase insurance policies and for those that cannot afford health insurance. Many of these organization are led by physicians, and other professionals that network together to make health care affordable for patients. In the HMO category there are five separate managed care plan models. First, the Group Model (HMO), is a group that has a number of physicians that mainly agree to provide care to a defined group of patients in return for a fix rate capita payment for discounted fees from insurance companies (Henderson, 2012 p.212).
In conclusion, there still needs to be a lot of work done to health care in the United States. Other nations provide universal health care to their citizens, but this would cause dilemmas in balancing two often conflicting policy goals: providing the public with equitable access to needed pharmaceuticals while controlling the costs. Universal health care probably would not work in the U.S. because our nation is so diverse and our economy is so complex. The system we have now obviously has its problems, and there is a lot of rom for improvement. HMO’s will still create problems for people and their medical bills, but they definitely should be monitored to see that their patients are receiving just treatment.
Universal health care refers to any system of health care managed by the government. The health care system may cover different programs including government run hospitals and health organizations and programs targeted at providing health care. Many developed countries such as Canada and United Kingdom have embraced universal health care with the United States being the only exception. The present U.S health care system has often been considered inefficient in terms of cost control as millions of Americans remain uncovered. This has made it the subject of a heated debate characterized by people who argue that the country requires a kind of socialized system that will permit increased government participation. Others have tended to support privatized health care, or a combined model of private and universal health care that will permit private companies to offer health care for a specific fee. Universal healthcare has numerous advantages that remain hidden from society. First, the federal government can apply economies of scale in managing health facilities which would reduce health care expenses. Second, all unnecessary expenses would be eliminated by requiring all states to bring together all the insurance companies into a single entity whose mandate would be to provide health insurance to all people. Lastly, increased government participation will guarantee quality care, improve access to medical services and address critical problems relating to market failure.
While most countries around the world have some form of universal national health care system, the United States, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, does not. There are much more benefits to the U.S. adopting a dorm of national health care system than to keep its current system, which has proved to be unnecessarily expensive, complicated, and overall inefficient.
The implementation of a universal health care system in the United States is an important challenge that needs to be overcome. There are numerous amount of editorial that argue on both sides of the debate. Some people argue that a universal health care system would bring costs down and increase access to care while others argue that a universal health care system would be too expensive and reduce the quality of care. The correct answer requires intensive understanding and economics to overcome, the arguments must be examined for a proper answer.
Most people do not make enough income to afford healthcare services short of the help of third party payers. Third party payers supply the bulk of medical payments. There are three parties involved in Physician and hospital reimbursement: the patient, the provider, and the insurance company that compensates the providers on behalf of the patient. Third party payers can be very competitive and the terms can either be simple or complex when it involves contract negotiations between physicians, hospitals. Physicians and hospitals should be familiar with negotiations, terms, and payment schedules.
One of the most commonly debated topics in recent American history has been that of health care. Would Americans be able to reap more benefits if individuals continue to be independent in their pursuits of health care, or would it be beneficial for all if the government introduced more regulations regarding health care, changing our system to resemble those of other developed countries? As more solutions are offered, it becomes harder for people to reach a consensus on the best way to approach this issue. Despite this, America must decide what system of healthcare will benefit the most citizens and improve the quality of life the most. It is becoming increasingly apparent that a universal healthcare system would be the most effective and
The government says if there was universal health care payroll taxes would double. Also if universal health care came into effect the wait time for a doctor visit would nearly double. These are good points but the wait time does not make a difference, all that matters is that most people in America will have health care. Many say it is to costly and limit service but studies constantly show when well managed to provide quality care it delivers better health outcomes at lower costs. Using a single payer health care system it would cover everyone under a single plan. What single payer does is gives access to prevention, early prevention, reducing insurance overhead, reduce provider overhead, and bulk purchasing power. Access to prevention and early Intervention is recieving access to primary care and can catch illness before its serious and costly. Reducing insurance overhead will stop advertising and competion. Reducing provider overhead will stop doctors from spending some much time on paperwork and pay more attention to actually care. One payer can bargain for the best prices this is bulk purchasing
The first side to the health care system is the Single Payer system. Many European countries, and our neighboring country Canada, have this type of system. This system has every citizen put his or her money into a fund that would be controlled by a federal agency. That agency would then pay for the treatment. Private insurance companies would basically be die off. The difference from this and our current health care system...
...ue to be manageable. Additionally, the Medicaid system leaves much open room for users to commit fraud undetected. Medicare would be a more ideal system if costs were based like those of the Medicaid system; many times the Medicare population are on limited incomes, so small co pays and lower medical costs would be more ideal.
The U.S. expends far more on healthcare than any other country in the world, yet we get fewer benefits, less than ideal health outcomes, and a lot of dissatisfaction manifested by unequal access, the significant numbers of uninsured and underinsured Americans, uneven quality, and unconstrained wastes. The financing of healthcare is also complicated, as there is no single payer system and payment schemes vary across payors and providers.
It is interesting with how different America’s health care is from everyone else in the world. Most are universal, required to have health care. We are trying to accomplish that in America, but many don’t like being taxed if they don’t have it. There definitely is a lot we can learn from other countries. Overall Switzerland has a great system set up, with the United Kingdom behind them. Japan is also on track. America is definitely trying to make head way, and eventually will. It all comes down to weighing what is most important, cost, quality, or access to health care.
As I started my Health Insurance class my belief was that this class will be pretty easy as I am familiar with much of the medical field. Personally having multiple illness’s and having three special needs children, personally I have learned so much within the medical field. However, as I began reading Chapters 1-3 in my Understanding Health Insurance book, the realization hit that I was not as knowledgeable as I thought I was. Therefore, I am eager and excited to learn new things in the medical field.