The cost-of-illness study is accepted to be a major evaluation technique in health care. By calculating and matching the economic burdens of diseases to the public, such studies can benefit health-care decision-makers to set up and prioritize health-care policies and interventions. Expanding economic theories introduces many research approaches that are primarily pertinent to most disease cases for estimating the costs of illness-related with mortality, morbidity, disability, and other disease characteristics. Moreover, present day ideas and scopes of costs along with diverse cost categories from changed study outlooks in cost
On a global scale, the United States is a relatively wealthy country of advanced industrialization. Unfortunately, the healthcare system is among the costliest, spending close to 18% of gross domestic product (GDP) towards funding healthcare (2011). No universal healthcare coverage is currently available. United States healthcare is currently funded through private, federal, state, and local sources. Coverage is provided privately and through the government and military. Nearly 85% of the U.S. population is covered to some extent, leaving a population of close to 48 million without any type of health insurance. Cost is the primary reason for lack of insurance and individuals foregoing medical care and use of prescription medications.
Miller, H. D. (2009). From volume to value: better ways to pay for health care. Health Affairs
Hicks, L. (2012). The Economics of Health and Medical Care (6th Ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
There are several basic approaches that can be utilized when conducting economic evaluations for any new health care intervention; which can include medications that are designed for the treatment and prevention of disease and how to relate the effectiveness with the overall monetary value of the new treatment. The economic tools that can be employed to perform such an analysis can be broken down into four basic parts that consist of cost-minimization analysis (CMA), cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA). These four categories will contain the major financial analytical techniques employed when evaluating medical treatments and interventions along with other types termed cost-consequence
Ormond, B., Spillman, B., Waidmann, T., Caswell, K., & Tereshchenko, B.. (2011). Potential National and State Medical Care Savings From Primary Disease Prevention. American Journal of Public Health, 101(1), 157-64. Retrieved February 23, 2011, from ProQuest Psychology Journals. (Document ID: 2233850141).
Health insurance is currently an important issue in the United States. Everyday more and more Americans become uninsured due to job loss and an increase in premiums. These Americans add to the ever growing population of 45.7 million people who are currently uninsured (Bialik). Moreover only 27% of those uninsured are under the age of 65 (NCHC). This is staggering considering most of those who are uninsured have, or soon will, suffer from some sort of illness or injury. As a result they will not be able to afford proper treatment. Insurance premiums can range in cost from fifty dollars per month, to fifteen hundred dollars per month (Kreidler). An individual’s premium is determined by factors they choose as well as other factors looked at by their provider. The cost of health insurance in America varies depending on the controllable factors, like particular insurance policies, and uncontrollable factors, like age.
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a seemingly straightforward analytical tool that is used to assess complex public policy decisions, however CEA does not always account for all intangible benefits. Cost-effectiveness is used to help pinpoint neglected opportunities for improving health and then allotting scarce resources to obtain better health outcomes for society. Since Britain’s has limited resources to concentrate on public health issues that have varying outcomes with regards to survival and quality of life. Cost-Utility Analysis (CUA), part of the cost-effectiveness family is an appropriate technique to utilize when making such decisions because it allows different health outcomes to be transformed to a common unit, known as QALYs (quality-adjusted life year). Yet, societal benefits and costs are often not considered for CUA. Additionally, measuring QALYs is harder than measuring the monetary value of life through improvements in health, as is done with cost–benefit analysis. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), also a part of the cost-effectiveness family is used to recognize value in terms of economic efficiency, in that it improves allocation of scarce resources. In addition, some individuals believe that life is invaluable and there are moral problems with assigning a value on human life.
As firmly stated by Ordoñez Ramírez, reevaluation of the list of diseases covered by the Popular Insurance Program is a crucial step towards not only helping relieve poverty and exorbitant prices for medical treatment, but decreasing the death toll due to inaccessible or inadequate medical treatment. However, in conjunction to re...
Iglehart, J.K (1999). The American health care system--expenditures. The New England Journal of Medicine, 340(1).
Rising medical costs are a worldwide problem, but nowhere are they higher than in the U.S. Although Americans with good health insurance coverage may get the best medical treatment in the world, the health of the average American, as measured by life expectancy and infant mortality, is below the average of other major industrial countries. Inefficiency, fraud and the expense of malpractice suits are often blamed for high U.S. costs, but the major reason is overinvestment in technology and personnel.
In order to make ones’ health care coverage more affordable, the nation needs to address the continually increasing medical care costs. Approximately more than one-sixth of the United States economy is devoted to health care spending, such as: soaring prices for medical services, costly prescription drugs, newly advanced medical technology, and even unhealthy lifestyles. Our system is spending approximately $2.7 trillion annually on health care. According to experts, it is estimated that approximately 20%-30% of that spending (approx. $800 billion a year) appears to go towards wasteful, redundant, or even inefficient care.
These individuals experience critical barriers that impact their health and well-being. These obstacles include finance. In the modern economy, nothing comes for free lunch. Health care services are never free as the various facilities providing the service demand huge capital to maintain the facility. In the US, all persons who have a job are required to pay for the NHS through their taxes. Also, most individuals pay for their prescriptions and various treatments, for instance, dental exertion or a trip to the chiropodist (Anderson, 2012). The costs don't just pose at primary medical care, but extend to who is going to pay for the critically ill individual to relocate to a residential home? Also, questions such as who will take care of the seriously sick person’s child. Indeed, a cost is becoming a cumulative barrier stopping many people from getting access to the health care they require. This barrier has been an issue for the U.S. as a country for many years. From the study, I found out that the most appropriate solution to this menace is that
Levit, K. R., & Cowan, C. A. (1991). Business, households and governments: Health care costs, 1990. Health Care Financing Review, 13 (2), 83. Retrieved from: Ashford University Library
Introduction Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a form of economic analysis that compares the relative costs and outcomes/effects of two or more scenarios. The CEA is typically expressed as a ratio, where the denominator is a gain in health using a natural unit of measurement (years of life, cases of flu prevented, etc.). and the numerator is the cost associated with that health gain. Most clinical studies express gains in health in terms of disease-specific measures, such as number of heart attacks avoided or cases of influenza prevented. Although this is useful for particular treatments related to those health conditions, those measures do not allow for comparison across diseases.
The cost of US health care has been steadily increasing for many years causing many Americans to face difficult choices between health care and other priorities in their lives. Health economists are bringing to light the tradeoffs which must be considered in every healthcare decision (Getzen, 2013, p. 427). Therefore, efforts must be made to incite change which constrains the cost of health care without creating adverse health consequences. As the medical field becomes more business oriented, there will be more of a shift in focus toward the costs and benefits, which will make medicine more like the rest of the economy (Getzen, 2013, p. 439).