What are the pluses and minuses of each? Which do you think would come closest to addressing the gap between the rich and poor and increase access to health care? (10 pts.) For Profit The health care advisers were getting paid more for finding instances where someone would not be able to get health insurance or to terminate the person’s health insurance. Not for profit They care for patients and not their wallets.
The Conservative party of time accepted this but argued that the general improvement of national health was more important than the the difference in health between social classes, but their opposition, Labour disagreed, arguing that it was more important to narrow this gap than to worry about the general improvement in health .Both are important issues to consider. For example, in 2001, 18.5% of people of a lower socio-economic status were in “poor health”, in comparison to only 3.4% of people in higher managerial or professional occupation. This clearly indicates a link but whether ill-health is directly because of a particular individual's income is debatable. As aforementioned, other factors play a role in health inequalities, for example race. Bangladeshi and Pakistani men and women are 4 times more likely than the general population to describe their health as poor.
This O.B. Mod., if used in the healthcare system, could not only save millions of dollars per year it may also save lives by reduction of medical errors. The following paper will provide general background of the O.B. Mod., detail several of the problems in the healthcare industry that could be improved by the O.B. Mod., show
Instead of debating whether or not health care should be universal, the U.S. should be debating on which venues to take to guarantee that all of its citizens have the right to health care. Health care should be considered a basic right not a luxury reserved for the wealthy and the struggling middle class that is able to afford some of it. Human life has greater value than money. Ironically, in the U.S. we rely on private insurance companies that are for profit and that don’t take into a consideration a patient’s health or economic condition. Why do we allow such a system to
Reflection Journal: Cost/benefit of Sustaining Life Social and Organizational Issues in Healthcare Southern New Hampshire University Written by: Pratikkumar Patel The economic evaluation of health and environmental interventions for sustaining a life is becoming increasingly important. In the light of limited funding, such evaluations can provide an important tool to demonstrate the economic return of investments in intervention, compare the effectiveness of one intervention against another and help policy-makers allocate their limited budget. As I see my career as a Healthcare Administrator, it is important for me to know method of economic evaluation that values all benefits against all costs. The resulting cost-benefit ratio gives an indication of whether or not the benefits outweigh the costs of an intervention, and hence provides a decision-making tool with a broad societal perspective. In this journal, I will be reflecting about how insurance companies, hospitals, and patients can use Cost-benefit analysis for sustaining a life.
Economic: though, critics have argued that new technologies have lead to the rise in cost of healthcare, in the same token, this issue should be viewed on the other end because with the advent of new technologies, some healthcare cost are cost reducing. As the critics continues to argue that short time use of new technologist may lead to a rise in short term expenditure but it should be taking into cognizance that a longer term cost effective analysis may also show a positive impact on healthcare status and lower cost over a life
Ramifications of Participation Contracts HCR/230 June 9, 2011 Ramifications of Participation Contracts Participation contracts must be reviewed carefully by providers before they agree to one. In some cases a participation contract may “pay less than a physician’s set fees resulting in less revenue, and can they also can limit a physicians professional judgment when treating patients” (Valerius, Bayes, Newby, & Seggern, 2008, p.305). Aside from these issues, participation contracts can increase revenue and patient numbers by using a providers name in advertisements in the newspaper or on the radio or television. Their names are also added to the list of participating providers given to plan members, so the number of patients could
Universal Healthcare would lower the mortality rate in the United States by solving the problem of the uninsured and the underinsured, as well as halt rising healthcare costs in the U.S. In addition, the consumer-driven healthcare system we now utilize reflects the uneven distribution of power
1). The purpose of this paper is to discuss why high productivity is essential in healthcare organizations, describe areas to increase employee productivity, calculate productivity, and to describe two models of productivity. Why is Productivity Important in Healthcare Organizations? The ability to reduce labor costs by even a small amount is crucial to increasing profit and decreasing losses. According to Heffler et al (2003), the National Health Expenditures (NHE) measures spending related to healthcare by types of services delivered in the United States (as cited by Huber, 2010, p. 702, para.
Say for instance that the US and the UK were on the same production function, but the U.S. economy were on the flat of the curve with little marginal gain in health at its current level of healthcare spending, then U.S. health outcomes might deteriorate relatively little when expenditures are cut back to the U.K. levels. This would result in substantial cost-saving and an increase in average productivity. But if the U.S. healthcare system lies on