HCA 205 Discussion Healthcare Systems Around the World

How do the people in France access health care?

The people in France access health care by applying at their local CPAM (Caisse Primaire Assurance Maladie) offices.

How do the citizens of the country pay for their healthcare?

The French citizens obligatorily pay a part of their healthcare by getting about thirteen percent of their salary deducted from their paychecks, and they spend a small cost each time they get checked by their doctors. The French government also contributes to the payment of its citizens’ healthcare.

What is the quality of the healthcare they receive? Are there unique services provided?

According to the article “France Offers the Best Healthcare on Earth,” the authors say that France provides one of the best health care quality at a lower cost and continuously receives high scores in the healthcare category of International Living’s Annual Global Retirement Index. Ed Dolan says in his article” What Can The US Learn From The French Health Care System?”, that French patients can choose their PCPs with minimal constraints and can see specialists of their choice. ” French Public Healthcare is recognized for its high quality, speed, and affordability.” (Jennifer, Rowell-Gastard, 2017). There are many services provided by public and private doctors, and the services fees are different.

Describe some of the Pros and Cons of the system.

French healthcare system offers many advantages, and price and quality care are some of them. French people believe that ” the greatest wealth is health.” and that is one of the reasons why equal access to healthcare is one of the French government’s missions. According to Jennifer, Rowell-Gastard, in the article (The Pros and Cons of the French Healthcare System” French people have equal access to health care at a very affordable price. In France, surgical procedures and major illness expenses like cancer are reimbursed 100 percent in public hospitals and some clinics. Some people migrate because they do not have enough money to get decent healthcare. In France, quality of care for all is the top priority. According to ms. Rowell-Gastard, Medical desert and over-prescription of medication are some of the Cons of the French healthcare system. In France, there are about 3.6 doctors for thousands of inhabitants, but most rural areas do not have enough doctors.

HCA 205 Discussion Healthcare Systems Around the World

Two similar examples between the French and the U.S. healthcare system.

The French and U.S. healthcare systems both rely on the private and government insurance. Also, both systems deal with malpractice cases.

Difference between the U.S. and French health care system

In France, everyone has access to health insurance, which is not the case in the U.S.

The waiting time to get a medical appointment is greater in the U.S.( Six days or more, according to Elisabeth, Rosenthal. ) than in France.

References:

Rowell-Gastard, J. (2017, September 01). The Pros and Cons of the French Healthcare System. Retrieved August 18, 2018, from https://www.renestance.com/blog/pros-cons-french-healthcare-system/

Blog, E. D. (2011, March 10). What Can The US Learn From The French Health Care System? Retrieved August 18, 2018, from https://www.businessinsider.com/what-can-the-us-learn-from-the-french-health-care-system-2011-3

(2017, December 07). France’s Excellent Healthcare System Just Got Easier For Expats. Retrieved August 18, 2018, from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/internationallivingcom/healthcare-in-france-expats_b_11830382.html

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS HCA 205 Discussion Healthcare Systems Around the World:

Health care systems of both France and the U.S. face crises of unprecedented scope. Both countries possess large and growing elderly populations that threaten to push the pace of health care price increases even higher than their already faster-than-inflation rates. Observers in both countries fear that outlays for increasingly expensive medical treatments and technologies will wreak havoc on public spending priorities. In the U.S, unchecked health care inflation will imperil Medicare and Medicaid, spur ever-larger federal budget deficits, and push up the embarrassingly large number of Americans without any medical insurance at all. In France, already insufficient resources have spurred strikes and demonstrations by doctors, while health care price hikes endanger that country’s commitment to its European partners to maintain low budget deficits. A delinquent performance by France could place the entire project of European Monetary Union in peril. Beyond these impending crises, American and French health care systems share several fundamental principles. Nonetheless, a World Health Organization report published in 2001 found that France has the best overall health care system among the 191 countries surveyed while the U.S. ranked 37th behind virtually all European countries as well as Morocco, Oman, and Costa Rica. Several factors explain the differences in the rankings of France and the United States. The most prominent factor was the large number of Americans whose access to care is limited because of their lack of health insurance—estimates range between 39 and 43 million. Despite this lack of coverage, America still spends far and away the most on its health care system at 13.7% of GDP while France spends 9.8%, placing it in the fourth position. Furthermore, it would be beneficial if everyone in the USA had access to healthcare like France. This is something that the US should mimick, because the people should be important. It seems that people in the US have to protest and march for good coverage, while France freely gives it.

I like your post on the health care system in Australia especially where you mentioned their approach on athleticism in their health care portfolio which is responsible for national sports programs and encourages sports and recreation in communities. This is a very nice system that brings out hidden talents in sports because athletes are nor shy of injuries and be stocked on who will care for their medical bills. This system will be beneficial to the United States health care system as citizens will be happy to participate in the health care system, it will gain a lot of trust and assurance from the population. The youths who participate in athletics will become more productive as their medicals bills be taken care through this system. Then the countries image will bolstered through a wonderful health care system that encourages participation through inclusion despite your social class or sponsorship.

Although Australia offers a great Healthcare system for their citizens, they operate in the public and the private sector. The healthcare that is being provided in the public sector is paid for through their government’s Medicare system; while in the private sector, the patient gets to choose what Doctor or Hospital they prefer. There is also a perk of less waiting times for specific procedures. Australian’s government can afford public healthcare for its citizens because the people of Australia pay a 2% Medicare income tax levy. The United States needs to take a look at how some of these countries operate and take notes. I would gladly pay 2% out of my income tax to basically get free healthcare or less expensive health care. I think the United States Government needs to start levying a tax on its citizens to offer us a form of insurance that is beneficial to all citizens. My main concern is can the U.S. government be trusted. They don’t have such an excellent track record. I genuinely don’t think the government could care less if its citizens had healthcare or not. I think the people who run the government think of ways to line their pockets. It is a shame that I feel this way, but I don’t see any progress that has been made to benefit the American people. It seems like the decisions have been made to help the already rich. The elderly pays a more significant price. They can barely get anything paid for. Sometimes they have to pick between medicine or eating, and that is a shame. Shame on our government for allowing this to happen. I think our Social Security System needs to be looked into because our elderly is cheated. They don’t get enough to take care of them and afford their medicines. They don’t even qualify for food stamps. It is unbelievable that a young person that is capable of working can get hundreds of dollars in food stamps but an older person that has put in their hard years of working can only get 16 dollars in food stamps. The system is backwards. Something that started to help people get on their feet has become a crutch. Something is wrong with our government in many areas, and it needs a complete overhaul and is totally out of control. When is it going to change?

O’Brien, L. On the blogs: Patient-Centered Care. Links to an external site.The inside scoop: A comparison of the US and Australian Healthcare Systems. Links to an external site.2017. Retrieved: https://onthewards.org/the-inside-scoop-part-one-a-comparison-of-the-us-and-australian-healthcare-systems/

Citizens of Sweden access health care through a tax-funded government health care program more commonly referred to as universal healthcare. Citizen also have the option to gain private health insurance, but because they all pay for health care already this is uncommon. Health Care starts at the highest government level where standards and regulations are set. It is then handed sown to local councils and municipalities to actually provide the health care.

Although Sweden has a very strong centrally funded system the access and issues still can mirror other countries with predominantly privatized health care. According to (Svanborg-Sjovall, 2014) “the biggest challenge to continued excellence in Sweden’s health and social care system is the issue of coordinating care between hospitals, primary care and local authorities”. Another similarity between both systems in the ability to choose your own provider. One of the biggest differences to the U.S. health care system is the Government funded system that takes precedent while private insurance is almost non-existent. Another large difference is Sweden’s 90 day specialist health care guarantee passed in 2005. With this ruling every patient will wait no longer than 90 days for surgery or specialty care after seeing their primary care doctor. If for whatever reason they cannot receive care within 90 days they are referred to another provider farther away and then reimbursed for the travel and expenses. Sweden’s healthcare system is used as a benchmark for the argument in the U.S. to switch to Universal tax based health care.

References:

Health care in Sweden. (2018, April 05). Retrieved from https://sweden.se/society/health-care-in-sweden/Links to an external site.

Svanborg-Sjövall, K. (2014, January 03). Swedish healthcare is the best in the world, but there are still lessons to learn. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2014/jan/03/sweden-healthcare-coordinate-oecd

Swedish/ Nordic Healthcare

In Sweden, healthcare is universal, and must cover all legal citizens. The EU (European Union), European Economic Areas, and even 9 other others that Sweden has agreements with, are covered by emergency services. Asylum-seekers, and undocumented children and adults are also covered, and will not be deterred away. Private insurance payments in Swedish/Nordic healthcare only make up 1%, as it is mainly work related and really not needed.

Healthcare is publicly financed by taxes and government grants There isn’t a defined packaged for benefits, as the country’s health coverage addresses everything from Public Health, Prescription Drugs, Mental Health and Long-Term care, with many other benefits in-between. If co-pays for some reason are needed, the Swedish government has a cap maximum amount of what would convert to 120USD.

What each copay is, varies on each individualized county located within the country. The average country wide being for hospitals is 11USD copay, when converted. Swedish treats the greatest need for services with precedence. However, the longest wait time allowed, is up to 90 days to see a physician. With this being the main con in the Swedish/Nordic healthcare system, it really doesn’t seem so bad, especially when considering there typically are no additional costs for most citizens to pay. The United States is a free-market healthcare system, whereas the Nordic health system is universal. Its very difficult to find similarities between the two countries. Sweden overall has much better health. They average a 9.7% obesity rate, where the US ranks at a 30.6%. Sweden also ranks 5th on the international scale of Quality of Healthcare, where the US ranks a very sad, 41st position. Sweden also has a faster discharge rate from hospitals, as their hospitals are non-for-profits, and they do not have any financial incentives to physicians. The US plays a lot with salary incentives for hospitals and physicians.

Colombian people access to the health care system through contributory regime, subsidized regime or private companies.

– Contributory regime: The contributory regime is the health system through which all persons linked through a work contract, public servants, retirees and independent workers with payment capacity, make a monthly contribution (contribution) to the health system paying directly to the EPS (Health promoting entities).

– Subsidized system: the State subsidizes the affiliation to the population without employment, employment contract or economic income, that is considered poor and vulnerable, who does not have the capacity to pay that allows them to contribute to the system (income below a minimum wage current legal) therefore those who enter it receive full or partial subsidies. There are two options:

New EPS: Independent workers with low income, retired, community mothers and / or domestic employees can be affiliated.

SISBEN: System of Identification of Beneficiaries of Social Subsidies (system of identification for social subsidies beneficiaries). You must provide socio-economic information and measures.

– Private companies: Private companies offer premium policies that expand upon the basic coverage.

How do the citizens of the country pay for the health care?

Contributory regime: The contribution to health must be 12.5% of the base salary of contribution, a percentage that is assumed entirely by independent workers, and in the case of employees, it assumes 4% and the employer 8.5%. In the case of retirees, they assume 100% of the payment of their pension contribution, which turns out to be an infamy, given that their pension income oscillates between half and a third of their previous salary income. Also, they have to pay for co-pays, they depend on the salary.

Subsidized regime: They are financed with two resources: the transfers of the nation to the departments and municipalities and the Solidarity and Guarantee Fund, FOSYGA, which in turn is nourished with a contribution one point five points (1.5) of the contribution of the special regimes and of exception and up to one point five (1.5) points of the contribution of the members to the Contributive Regime, and of contributions of the nation.

Private companies: Their own pocket. Monthly expensive pay, you can choose what services you want and in what hospitals you want to attend.

What is the quality of the health care they receive? Are there unique services provided?

Contributory regime: the service is provided through the EPS The Healthcare Providers. You received all services and you can be seen in any hospital but if you are in treatment and you have to see the specialist, maybe your appointment is going to give you in two months.

Subsidized regime: Comprehensive Medical Care Centers (CAMI), they have limited hours and services. You can visit some hospitals and clinics.

Private companies: the best clinics and hospitals, fastest service.

Describe some of the pros and cons of the system.

Cons: economic corruption and budget deviation. It is well structured but not implemented correctly.
- Pros: The World Health Organization ranked the health systems of 191 countries, Colombia ranked # 22 because of its high quality, low cost and easy access.

Differentiate between U.S. health care and the health care system of the country you chose by sharing at least two examples of how they are different.

The health service is determinate by the socio-economic stratum of each person or family. (1 to 6, being 1 the poorest and 6 the richest).

If you are not subscribing to any health plan, contributory or non contributory , you cannot be attending to any service. You will not be able to pay after the service.

How do people in Switzerland access health care?

Health care in Switzerland is regulated by the Swiss Federal Law on Health Insurance and is Universal. Their health insurance covers the costs of medical treatment and hospitalization of those that are insured. In this system, the insured person pays part of the cost of treatment. There are no free state-provided health services but they have a compulsory private health insurance for persons residing in Switzerland either being born there(citizen) or within three months of taking up residence there.

. How do citizens in Switzerland pay for the health care?

Health care in Switzerland is paid by individuals and through contributions into the Swiss health insurance schemes. Studies show that, in 2017, an adult pays an average of CHF 447 in Swiss health insurance premiums. It is not paid by employers or nor from taxable income.

. What is the quality of the health care they receive? Are there unique services provided?

The Swiss health care system is renowned in Europe and the world at large. The country spends about 10% of its GDP on health thus placing Switzerland near the top of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) for medical expenditure. They possess a wealth of medical facilities and modern technology. They have one of the world’s lowest patient-to doctor ratio. They also have a high ratio of well-trained nurses and doctors. This quality services rendered to the population might be the reason why the were ranked 10th in the world in 2010 for high life expectancy and the lowest infant mortality rate rate ranked 16th lowest in 2010. Unique services provide by the best equipped medical facilities and no waiting lists.

. Describe some of the pros and cons of the system.

Some of the pros are; with the sophisticated health care equipment, high quality health care, there is a guarantee of good health except otherwise. It makes the working population active and more productive. Also, the system is so flexible to access health care providers like a doctor, and health care facilities. But one the cons is, the health care is expensive. They are trying to make-up the cost of the equipment. Also, there is no free medical treatment in Switzerland, some times people are turned down in emergencies room because they cannot provide proof of health insurance. It is also only for those that can afford.

. Similarities between Swiss and American health care system.

. Citizens of both countries are required to purchase health insurance through a private insurer

. Both governments subsidizes health insurance premiums based on each individual’s income.

. Health insurers are required to offer comprehensive policies that cover a wide range of medical care.

. Differences between Swiss and American health care system.

. In Switzerland, employers do not provide health insurance for their workers, citizens must purchase their individual policies. This is unlike in America where employers with above twenty(25) workers are to provide health insurance for their workers.

. In Switzerland, premiums do not vary by age. A 22 year old pays the same as a 55 year old. This different in America where premiums vary with age.

References.

Swiss Federal Statistical Office (FSO), Costs and Financing of the Health care system 2014 (FSO), 2016). Swiss Health Observatory (Obsan), National Health Report 2015 (Hogrefe, 2015).

Cinderella, the Canadian Health system is similar to Obama Care as the United States system was based upon the Canadian system. While everyone thought health care would be free, it is not. Each person is expected to pay something which has caused problems. I think the though process is that “why should I pay for insurance I may never use when I can pay for an iPhone which I use every day”. There was a case in my area recently in which a 17 year old young man died because he did not want to cause financial strain for his family. They had recently lost their home on the river due to flooding. He was having some pain but did not complain. To make the story shorter-he was driving across the country with his sister, who happened to be a nurse, when he developed breathing problems. She got him to the nearest hospital where he was diagnosed with primary testicular cancer which had already metastasized to the lungs and brain. He died two weeks after diagnosis. These are the case which break your heart. Individuals must have insurance! I have heard people say that they cannot afford it. I feel that I cannot afford to be without it and do not expect others to pay for my medical needs. However, I do not mind helping those who really cannot afford insurance, but do not expect me to help you if you smoke, drink and pay your money out for fancy cable service, vehicles, etc. There are far too much experienced freeloaders in the world today. Elizabeth did a great job with her graphic showingthe perceptions of the Canadian health care system. my company is ivestigating the health system there and may enter teh market soon for EHRs. I had hoped to go for some installs but now plan to be retired before our time comes. It seems that the way their market operates it will be an all or nothing venture. That would be huge for us.

HCA 205 Discussion Healthcare Systems Around the World