The Most Significant Aspect within the Organization of the US Health Care System - Term Paper Example

? Health Care System: Country Comparison of Health Care System: Country Comparison US Health Care Fact Sheet US’s health care system is argued to be one of the most organized systems in care regardless of the inevitable challenges that is faced by health care organizations and agencies (Blank, 2012). The ownership of health care system in the US is dominated by the private sector. The most significant aspect within the organization of the US’s health care system is however the aspect of health insurance. Employers provide health insurance to majority of the US citizens. Nonetheless some citizens purchase health insurance on their own while others are not insured at all. In particular, 17% of the US citizens were reported to be uninsured in 2011. This report was provided by the Census Bureau. The public sector in the health care is operated and provided by the government with various programs being designed and implemented with a purpose of ensuring health care for all (Odier, 2010). Among these programs are Medicaid and Medicare which operates the spending of the government in health care. The US government is said to be the third largest spender on health care in the world. This is demonstrated by the 2011 statistics that were put forth by the World health Organization. In accordance to WHO, a 16.4% expenditure on health care is recorded in the US as a fraction of its GDP (Blank, 2012). The number of uninsured individuals within the US is increasing steadily. It is due of this that more than 45% of the cases of bankruptcy among individuals are attributed to lack of medical insurance. Proportionately, the amount of medical debt within the US has grown significantly (Odier, 2010). This is the case regardless of the fact that the government is spending much more on health care. The challenges that the US is facing within its health care system has led to criticisms and debates which are geared toward creation of reforms within the organization of the health care system (Diggs, 2012). These debates are fuelled by the large amount of the taxpayers’ money which goes to health care. Regardless of the government spending on this sector, it is argued that health care especially in public health facilities is less equivalent to the expenditure that is input in this sector. A study in Harvard University reported that more than 50, 000 individuals die in excess because they lack health insurance (Odier, 2010). The 2009 study further revealed that the life expectancy of US citizens was below the EU’s average life expectancy. At 78, the US life expectancy therefore ranked below some developing states and most developed countries (Diggs, 2012). This state is attributed to the fact that the US citizens are not wholly guaranteed of health care regardless of large amount of spending within the country on health care. It is in line with this that the WHO ranked the US at 37th position among world states in regard to health care. This situation has led to the situation where investors are spending more on private health care sector. As a result of the disparities in the organization of the US health care system, the private sector is playing even an increasing role in the provision of health care. This is the case especially within the working class and the wealthy in the US society who are able to afford the relatively high costs of care within the private sector (Odier, 2010). The US health care system is further characterized by relatively sufficient in number of health care providers and application of medical technology in care, pharmaceuticals and health care research. Sweden Health Care Fact Sheet Sweden is said to rank at 17th position in regard to the organization of its health care system. This country’s health care system is mainly decentralized in organization. Moreover it is the Government of Swedish people that play the major role in the funding of health care (Ranerup, Noren & Sparud-Lundin, 2012). It is therefore evident that the government plays a dominant role in health care delivery within Sweden. Nonetheless it is to be noted that the private sector in care delivery also is important within Sweden (Ovretveit, Hansson & Brommels, 2010). The decentralization of Sweden’s health care system has a significant impact on its organization and management. It is noted that there is a national level of health care in this country which is followed by regional level of health care. The local health care level is the lowest within the organization of Sweden’s health care (Ranerup, Noren & Sparud-Lundin, 2012). Regardless of this decentralization though, the government at the national level plays the supervisory and regulatory role for health care at the lower levels within Sweden (Robone, Rice & Smith, 2011). It is in this regard that the national objectives and goals for care must be adhered to by all levels of care. The national expenditure on health care within Sweden is much lower. Specifically, it is about 8.9% of the country’s GDP that is spent on health care (Ovretveit, Hansson & Brommels, 2010). More significantly, the expenditure of the government is less variant and more stable (Ranerup, Noren & Sparud-Lundin, 2012). The legal framework within Sweden allows councils at the local level to collect levies and taxes that are geared towards the provision of health care to citizens. It is due to this that more than 70% of the health care funding emanates from the taxes at the local level (Ranerup, Noren & Sparud-Lundin, 2012). Through these taxes, the Swedish government funds about 98% of the health care of its citizens. The immediate emergency care that characterizes the Swedish health system makes it to be among the top ranking in the world as demonstrated by the WHO global health care statistics (Ovretveit, Hansson & Brommels, 2010). Comparison and Conclusion The health care systems of the US and Sweden are both characterized by the public and private sectors. Nonetheless the private sector in health care dominates within the US, a situation which is different in Sweden where the public plays the significant role health care. This difference can be attributed to the differences in management and organization of these two health care systems. On one hand, the Swedish health care system is decentralized while that of the US is majorly centralized with some level of decentralization within the states (Robone, Rice & Smith, 2011). The decentralized organization and management of the Swedish health care system is attributed to its efficiency and effectiveness that surpasses that of the US (Robone, Rice & Smith, 2011). This is demonstrated by the significant contribution of the local level in health care. Moreover, the global ranking of the Swedish health care is better than that of the US as demonstrated within the above sections. This is largely due to the different approaches in the management and organization of these systems. Nonetheless the application of technology in medical care, pharmaceuticals and health care research within the US surpasses that of Sweden. This would be result of the differences in economic development between these two countries. The fact that the Swedish government funds almost all health care services demonstrates a difference with the US system where employers provide medical insurance for its citizens with many more reported to lack the medical cover. It is because of this that the life expectancy in the US is lower than that of Sweden. In addition, there are more deaths in the US that results from lack of medical cover. Sweden on the other hand registers relatively low deaths because of the efficiency within its health care organizations especially in the provision of emergency care (Robone, Rice & Smith, 2011). In the light of the above analyses and discussions, it is evident that the Swedish health care system is more organized and better managed. This is the case regardless of the fact that the US is more developed economically. More importantly is the difference in the medical expenditure within the proportions of these countries’ GDP. It is notable that regardless of more expenditure in health care within the US, more deaths are recorded as compared to Sweden. It is in this light that it is conclusive that the management and organization of any health system plays a significant role in defining the efficiency and effectiveness of health care organizations. References Blank, R. (2012). Transformation of the US Healthcare System: Why is change so difficult?. Current Sociology, 60(4), 415-426 Diggs, S. N. (2012). Health Disparities and Health Care Financing: Restructuring the American Health Care System. Journal of Health Care Finance, 38(4), 76-90. Odier, N. (2010). The US health-care system: A proposal for reform. Journal of Medical Marketing, 10(4), 279-304. doi:10.1057/jmm.2010.17 Ovretveit, J., Hansson, J., & Brommels, M. (2010). An integrated health and social care organization in Sweden: Creation and structure of a unique local public health and social care system. Health Policy, 97(2/3), 113-121 Ranerup, A., Noren, L., & Sparud-Lundin, C. (2012). Decision support systems for choosing a primary health care provider in Sweden. Patient Education & Counseling, 86(3), 342-347 Robone, S., Rice, N., & Smith, P. C. (2011). Health Systems' Responsiveness and Its Characteristics: A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis. Health Services Research, 46(6pt2), 2079-2100 Read More