Health care system in comparison: Learning from the US and New Zealand
New Zealand and the United States put a great deal of attention to their health care where they share some similarities, as well as differences. Both countries similarly focus on a better number of covered individuals on order to create an enrolled population. However, both countries are the example two significantly different health care approaches regarding their service scope, benefit, and financing sources. This essay tries to explore the differences and the pros and cons of the approaches based on the services’ efficiency, expenditure regulation and equity of access and financing.
The US and NZ health care systems: Some basic differences
New Zealand health care is known to have a universal coverage meaning almost every citizen has the same access to the service. Controlled by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), a crown entity that is solely responsible for the service and almost of off the health care financing. Public dollars from taxpayers in NZ accounts for 78 percent of the total funding of health care. Individual sources of funding come the second and private insures come the last. The United States, in contrast, poses a starkly different fixture (see Table 1). Public funding covers 44 percent of the National Health Service, while private insurance and out of pocket resources account for 41 percent and 15 percent respectively. While in the US that health care funding comes from the
In The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care (2009), the author of the book, T.R. Reid travels to industrialized democracies to discuss the different methods of health care delivery system used in these developed countries and compare them to the health care system of the United States. According to T.R. Reid (2009), “the thesis of this book is that we can find cost-effective ways to cover every American by borrowing ideas from foreign models of health care” (Reid, 2009, p. 11). This thesis illustrates that the American health care system can manage health care costs effectively and provide care to all by using some of the successful health care delivery models of foreign nations. The purpose of this book analysis is to discuss the four different health care models presented in this book and provide my prioritization or ranking of these models. This analysis also aims to investigate a case known as the Nikki White case described in this book and discuss the lessons learned from it. Furthermore, this analysis is going to provide my remarks on the, “An Apple a Day” comment relative to the Public Health Model. Lastly, in this book analysis, I will share my conclusion on the basic premise of the book along with my take away messages that I will remember into my future as a Public Health professional.
In the United States we have private healthcare which each individual person has to pay
This paper will compare the healthcare service and healthcare status between Canada and the United States. Canada and the United States have a totally different healthcare system. Many people argued that the United States healthcare system needs some upgrading, while, some people admire Canada’s healthcare system due to the fact that Canada’s healthcare does more for less. Research has shown that Canada spends less of its’ GDP on it’s healthcare yet performs better than the United States.
This paper presents a comparison of the health care systems in the United States and the Netherlands. The health care systems in the United States and the Netherlands are both a work in progress. This paper compares the many common strengths and weaknesses between these two countries health care systems using recent data and current trends. The government of the Netherlands has been working towards providing universal health coverage for their citizens since World War II. The government of the United States is divided on the necessity of providing universal health coverage for its citizens; however, it appears to be moving in this direction. The United States approximately 70 years behind the Netherlands on the health care front. Comparing the similarities and differences in the health care systems of the United States and the Netherlands gives a lot of insight into policy changes and reform that could benefit the United States. The continually improving health care system in the Netherlands may be the best model for the United States as it moves towards a Universal Health Care system.
The Canadian healthcare system was first established in the late 1940’s and is made up of socialized health insurance plans that provide coverage to every Canadian citizen. Publicly funded and managed, rules are set forth by the federal government. In the 1960’s, Canada in essence, has had universal healthcare coverage for all services provided by physicians and hospitals. Change your source ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada 2014) Whereas, the healthcare system in America originated in the 1800’s, but truly wasn’t established until the late 1920’s. Healthcare in America was initially for teachers for a low cost in Dallas Texas by Justin Kimball. Change you source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/) Healthcare in the United States is mostly privately funded with only a few publicly funded entities such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Canadian and U.S. healthcare system s have been under a lot of scrutiny over the years, being the topic of every political conversation. In this essay, I will write about the main differences between the U.S and Canadian Health-care system, and help shed some light on how each system works. The main points I will be discussing are the wait times to see a primary care physician, the funding of each countries health care system, accessibility to medical care and the quality of care.
Two simple questions, without a simple answer to either. In this paper were going to try and answer these questions and a few other important questions about the healthcare system in our country.
The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the Healthcare system in the United States versus the Healthcare system in the United Kingdom. When comparing the healthcare systems of the two countries the first thing that should be done is determining the differences between a “Good Healthcare System, which is the best attainable average level and a Fair Healthcare System, which is the smallest feasible differences among individuals and groups.” Ibid., p. 27-35 Data also analyzed in Gerard Anderson and
The health care system varies from country to country although a factor they all have in common is that great measures of research are taken in order to find results and achieve a good health care system for the economy. Between Australia and japan, there are great initiatives taken to help in association to this, including economic, social and political circumstances, all influencing the way in which the countries health care system is shaped and run.
There are providers, of public hospitals community and rural health centers, and local health department considered to be safety net providers that service the uninsured. But the result of increased demand has caused limited capacity and decreased treatment options due to eroding finances (KFF, 2013). In order to improve the well beings of Americans, it is imperative to establish a health care policy that will deliver comprehensive coverage for all.
Health care systems are different in every country around the world. There are four main components that complete a health care delivery system, described by Shi and Singh (2015) as the quad-function model, which includes insurance, financing, payment and delivery of care (p. 5). Along with the components of the quad-function model it is important to analyze a countries access to care, their health outcomes and how public health is integrated into the health care delivery system. The United States has a unique health care system that is like no other country. Great Britian, in contrast, also has a unique system that is very different than the United States.
This paper outlines the differences between the healthcare systems of the United States and the United Kingdom and expands on what that means for the health and wealth of the citizens of these countries. The U.S. and the U.K. are two different countries with two very different healthcare systems. The U.S. healthcare system is the Affordable Care Act, (ACA) and is the attempt by the U.S. to provide affordable healthcare coverage. he U.K. healthcare system is publicly financed and managed by the National Health Service, (NHS). The U.S. healthcare system is largely private sector whereas the healthcare in the U.K. is public. “The U.S. spends more on health care than any other country in the nation while the U.K. is a country that spends
Universal Healthcare sounds appealing, but it actually lowers the quality and quantity of healthcare services that are rendered to patients, thus downgrading the healthcare system as a whole. Not having to pay, with everyone having coverage leads to longer wait times for medical service and many people overusing health care services. Implementation of Universal Healthcare in the United States would lead to a detrimental crippling of the nation’s health system. For those countries that have implemented Universal Healthcare or a system similar to it, all or most aspects of the coverage such as cost and care is generally provided by and tightly controlled by the government, a public-sector committee, or employer-based programs, with most of the funding essentially coming from tax revenues or budget cuts in other areas of spending. This paper will conclude with comparing the US healthcare system to others and how the US has one of the most advanced systems in the world.
It is a patchwork of loosely connected financing mechanisms varying in terms of sponsorship and provider type. It also reflects the age, health and economic status of the specific patient groups that are being served. Considering the growing number of Americans who are uninsured for health care and the low ranking of the United States among a variety of health indicators, one may say that it is a disappointing financing system. These observations provide a basis for supporting our position for a national health care system. Where possible, comparisons will be drawn between the United States and other countries. Special focus will be paid to similarities in the public and private financing components of the system, reimbursement of various provider categories and trends that we may expect to see in the future.
Is it possible for two countries which are thousands of kilometers away from each other to have some similarities in their health care system? Health care system is one of the most important and fundamental sectors in any country or region all around the world. Many countries pour a major amount of their overall income to support the health care system. And the main reason behind this tremendous effort provided by the countries all around the world for the health care system is that each country wants to provide a good and high standard health care services for all the population occupying the land whether they were local citizens or Non- local citizens . This essay will compare and contrast the health care system in two wonderful countries:
In our world each country has a set of standards to follow in order to establish health care insurance for people in different communities. The state contributes about 40% of all the expenditures on health while the public health sector delivers 80% of the population. Many resources are concentrated in the private health sector. These resources see to the health needs of the remaining 20% of the population. Public health consumes around 11% of the government’s total budget. The way the resources are allotted, and the standard of health care delivered, varies from country to country. Although there are similarities between South Africa and the United States regarding healthcare, South Africa remains at a lower