Liberal benefits, conservative spending. The Physicians for a National Health Program proposal

The Physicians for a National Health Program proposes to cover all Americans under a single, comprehensive public insurance program without copayments or deductibles and with free choice of provider. Such a national health program could reap tens of billions dollars in administrative savings in the initial years, enough to fund generous increases in health care services not only for the uninsured, but for the underinsured as well. We delineate a transitional national health program budget that would hold overall health spending at current levels while accommodating increases in hospital and physician utilization. Future national health program spending would be indexed to the growth in gross national product adjusted for demographic, epidemiologic, and technologic shifts. Financing for the national health program would transfer funds into the public program without disrupting the general pattern of current revenue sources. We suggest a funding package that would augment existing government health spending with earmarked health care taxes. Because these new taxes would replace employer-employee insurance premiums and substantial portions of current out-of-pocket expenditures, they would not increase health costs for the average American.     

Health USA. A national health program for the United States.

The Health USA Act of 1991 addresses two fundamental health services financing problems: the more than 30 million uninsured persons and the rising costs for health care and for health insurance. Health USA would provide coverage of the entire resident population for comprehensive medical and preventive health and long-term care services through a universal tax-funded financing system. The federal government would contribute an average of 87% of program costs to each state, which would establish, under federal guidelines, a state health program. Each individual or family may enroll in any health plan approved by the state program, including many private plans, or a plan run by the state program. Through the approved plan of their choice, enrollees would receive covered services and obtain their care from participating physicians and other professional practitioners, hospitals, and other facilities. The state program would pay approved plans a capitation payment for every person enrolled. The plans would pay professional providers fees, as part of an all-payer system of fee schedules and expenditure targets, or capitation payments or salary. Hospitals would be financed through global budgets negotiated by the state program with each hospital. The plan run by the state program would pay the health care costs of any person who does not enroll in an approved plan, making the state plan the payer of last resort and eliminating uncompensated care and cost shifting by providers. Health USA would separate health care coverage from employment, ensuring uninterrupted coverage and eliminating employers' administrative role in providing coverage. Federal and state taxes would replace present methods of financing by private insurance premiums and large out-of-pocket expenditures. Building on the present system of health plans, Health USA would offer all persons a wide choice of competing plans in which to enroll and offer professional providers a wide choice of plans in which to practice. It would control costs by increasing financial accountability of providers and health plans, reducing present reliance on intrusive utilization review and on patient cost sharing. By controlling health care and administrative costs, Health USA would cover the entire population and, according to independent cost estimates, reduce national health expenditures by $11.5 billion in 1991.     

Oral health in North Carolina: innovations, opportunities, and challenges

Dental disease can have negative and lasting effects on overall health and quality of life. The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences reported last year that close to 5 million children in the United States did not receive needed care in 2008 because of costs. Increasing use of dental care has been selected by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as one of a small number of national leading health indicators, designating it as a national priority. Innovative initiatives have been undertaken in North Carolina to promote oral health, and there have been improvements in the state. For example, both the use of dental services among children and their oral health status are improving. Yet persistent and difficult challenges remain, such as ensuring an adequate workforce for the future, improving oral health literacy, maintaining existing programs, and resolving disparities in oral health and lifetime access to preventive and treatment services for all North Carolinians. This issue brief reviews some oral health initiatives and their outcomes--with a focus on youth. Commentaries in the policy forum also focus on access to oral health care; assessing, educating, and building the dental workforce; new practice models and trends; insurance innovation; and patients with special needs.     

A national long-term care program for the United States. A caring vision. The Working Group on Long-term Care Program Design, Physicians for a National Health Program.

The financing and delivery of long-term care (LTC) need substantial reform. Many cannot afford essential services; age restrictions often arbitrarily limit access for the nonelderly, although more than a third of those needing care are under 65 years old; Medicaid, the principal third-party payer for LTC, is biased toward nursing home care and discourages independent living; informal care provided by relatives and friends, the only assistance used by 70% of those needing LTC, is neither supported nor encouraged; and insurance coverage often excludes critically important services that fall outside narrow definitions of medically necessary care. We describe an LTC program designed as an integral component of the national health program advanced by Physicians for a National Health Program. Everyone would be covered for all medically and socially necessary services under a single public plan, federally mandated and funded but administered locally. An LTC payment board in each state would contract directly with providers through a network of local public agencies responsible for eligibility determination and care coordination. Nursing homes, home care agencies, and other institutional providers would be paid a global budget to cover all operating costs and would not bill on a per-patient basis. Alternatively, integrated provider organizations could receive a capitation fee to cover a broad range of LTC and acute care services. Individual practitioners could continue to be paid on a fee-for-service basis or could receive salaries from institutional providers. Support for innovation, training of LTC personnel, and monitoring of the quality of care would be greatly augmented. For-profit providers would be compensated for past investments and phased out. Our program would add between $18 billion and $23.5 billion annually to current spending on LTC. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans want such a program and are willing to pay earmarked taxes to support it.     

Why single payer? Why now?

US health care costs are the highest in the world and are again rising. A reopening of debate on health care reform is imminent. More than 44 million Americans have no health insurance, an increase of 11 million people since 1989. Although women have been slightly more likely to have health insurance than men, recent declines in Medicaid enrollment resulting from welfare reform are eroding this slim advantage. Being uninsured is associated with compromised access to primary care and an increased risk of dying. At least 29 million Americans are underinsured; although they have some insurance, they would nonetheless be bankrupted by a major illness. A single-payer national health insurance system would cover all Americans in a non-profit, tax-funded system similar to Social Security. It would simplify health administration, saving at least $100 billion annually on paperwork and redirecting that money to patient care.     

Social health insurance: A knowledge-do gap in eastern Nepal

Health care costs, and those for inpatient care in particular, pose a barrier to seeking health care, and cost be a major cause of indebtedness and impoverishment, particularly among the poor. The Ministry of Health in Nepal intends to initiate alternative financing schemes such as community and social health insurance schemes as a means to supplement the government health sector financing source. Social Health Insurance (SHI) is a mechanism for financing and purchasing / delivering health care to workers in the formal sector regulated by the government. Considering all these facts BP Koirala Institute of Health Sciences (BPKIHS) has introduced SHI scheme in 2000 as an alternative health care financing mechanism to the community people of Sunsari and Morang districts. In the beginning small area was elected as a pilot project to launch the scheme. A major objective of SHI is to reduce poverty caused by paying for health care and to prevent already vulnerable families from falling into deeper poverty when facing health problems. A total of 26 organizations with 19799 populations are at present in SHI scheme. Sixteen rural based organizations with 14,047 populations and 10 urban based organizations with 5752 people are the beneficiaries in this scheme. BPKIHS SHI Scheme is the outcome of the visionary thinking on social solidarity and as an alternative health care financing mechanism to the community. BPKIHS is mobilizing people's organizations and is offering health services through its health insurance scheme at subsidized expenses. This has helped people to avail with health facilities who otherwise would have been left vulnerable because of their penetrating health needs. There is huge gap between premium collection and expenditures. The expenditures are more and this may be due to knowledge - do gap in the program. If conditions are unsuitable, SHI can lead to higher costs of care, inefficient allocation of health care resources, inequitable provision and dissatisfied patients. It can also be more difficult to realize the potential advantages of SHI in future. The future challenges confronting the scheme are to give the continuity and sustainability of the program to its catchments areas. This might entail a shift in its program operation mechanism. People's active involvement is required, which will further provide a sense of ownership in the scheme amongst the people.     

Why not private health insurance? 1. Insurance made easy

How realistic are proposals to expand the financing of Canadian health care through private insurance, either in a parallel stream or an expanded supplementary tier? Any successful business requires that revenues exceed expenditures. Under a voluntary health insurance plan those at highest risk would be the most likely to seek coverage; insurers working within a competitive market would have to limit their financial risk through such mechanisms as "risk selection" to avoid clients likely to incur high costs and/or imposing caps on the costs covered. It is unlikely that parallel private plans will have a market if a comprehensive public insurance system continues to exist and function well. Although supplementary plans are more congruous with insurance principles, they would raise costs for purchasers and would probably not provide full open-ended coverage to all potential clients. Insurance principles suggest that voluntary insurance plans that shift costs to the private sector would damage the publicly funded system and would be unable to cover costs for all services required.     

The US health care system: On a road to nowhere?

THIS ARTICLE REVIEWS THE CURRENT STATE AND FUTURE PROSPECTS of the health care system in the United States. The 1990s were a decade of reform and change in US medical care, with the debate over the Clinton plan for universal insurance and, after its defeat, the spread of managed care. In particular, managed care had a profound impact on the delivery of medical services, transforming traditional insurance arrangements. However, after all of the changes, the United States appears to be no closer to solving the problems that have characterized its health care system for the past 3 decades. Over 40 million Americans lack health insurance, universal coverage is nowhere in sight, and medical care costs are rising again after a period of moderation. It is doubtful that incremental health reforms will significantly ameliorate these problems.     

改善医疗民生，加快城市社区卫生服务建设的思考

医疗卫生是社会保障的重要组成部分,政府对医疗服务、医疗保险、医药市场的有效管理,是促使医疗保障制度有效解除国民疾病医疗后顾之忧的必要条件。社区卫生服务是社会保障体系的重要组成部分,着眼于广大人民群众的基本医疗保健需求,其目的是提高全民的健康素质和水平。完善以社区卫生服务为基础的新型城市医疗卫生服务体系是建设覆盖城乡居民的公共卫生服务体系、医疗服务体系、医疗保障体系、药品供应保障体系的基础,也是改善医疗民生的网底。长期以来,医疗资源分布不均衡,社区医疗投入不足,发展滞后,已成为影响医疗公平和医疗事业和谐发展的重要因素,关注和改善医疗民生必须从财政投入、医疗规划和人事制度扶持等方面建立长效机制,凸显社区卫生服务公益性。     

Core and comprehensive health care services: 4. Economic issues.

This article reviews the economic dimensions of the CMA's decision-making framework on core and comprehensive services. The framework was developed in a policy context characterized by three government objectives: reduction, reallocation and reassignment of health care resources. One economic-evaluation tool for the determination of core services is cost-effectiveness analysis. Some of the critical demand-side and supply-side considerations include the perceived value of medical services, the availability of private insurance and the supply of health care providers. The article concludes that shifting services to the private sector should not be viewed as a panacea for reducing the costs and improving the economic efficiency of the health care system, or for increasing patient access to, or the cost-effectiveness of high-quality care.     

A call for action. The Pepper Commission's blueprint for health care reform

After a year of deliberation and investigation, the Pepper Commission recommended action to ensure that all Americans would have health insurance protection in an efficient, effective health care system. Because it believes that action is urgent, the commission would build universal coverage by securing, improving, and extending the combination of job-based and public coverage we now have. Reform would entail the following elements: a combination of incentives and requirements that would guarantee all workers (with their nonworking dependents) insurance coverage through their jobs; replacement of Medicaid with a new federal program that would cover all those not covered through the workplace and workers whose employers find public coverage more affordable; guaranteed affordable coverage for employers--through reform of private insurance, tax credits for small employers, and the opportunity to purchase public coverage; a minimum benefit standard for private and public plans that would cover preventive and primary services as well as catastrophic care and would include cost sharing, subject to ability to pay; and a combination of public and private sector initiatives to promote quality and contain costs.     

Proposal of the Physicians' Working Group for Single-Payer National Health Insurance

The Physicians' Working Group for Single-Payer National Health Insurance^*

JAMA. 2003;290:798-805.

The United States spends more than twice as much on health care as the average of other developed nations, all of which boast universal coverage. Yet more than 41 million Americans have no health insurance. Many more are underinsured. Confronted by the rising costs and capabilities of modern medicine, other nations have chosen national health insurance (NHI). The United States alone treats health care as a commodity distributed according to the ability to pay, rather than as a social service to be distributed according to medical need. In this market-driven system, insurers and providers compete not so much by increasing quality or lowering costs, but by avoiding unprofitable patients and shifting costs back to patients or to other payers. This creates the paradox of a health care system based on avoiding the sick. It generates huge administrative costs that, along with profits, divert resources from clinical care to the demands of business. In addition, burgeoning satellite businesses, such as consulting firms and marketing companies, consume an increasing fraction of the health care dollar. We endorse a fundamental change in US health care—the creation of an NHI program. Such a program, which in essence would be an expanded and improved version of traditional Medicare, would cover every American for all necessary medical care. An NHI program would save at least $200 billion annually (more than enough to cover all of the uninsured) by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private, investor-owned insurance industry and reducing spending for marketing and other satellite services. Physicians and hospitals would be freed from the concomitant burdens and expenses of paperwork created by having to deal with multiple insurers with different rules, often designed to avoid payment. National health insurance would make it possible to set and enforce overall spending limits for the health care system, slowing cost growth over the long run. An NHI program is the only affordable option for universal, comprehensive coverage.

     

A tax reform strategy to deal with the uninsured

The high level of ininsurance in the United States is due in large measure to the tax treatment of health care, which is based on the tax exclusion for company-provided plans. Correcting the perverse incentives for providers and patients resulting from this tax treatment is the crucial step to creating a national health care system that is affordable and efficient. The Heritage Foundation proposal calls for the elimination of the current tax exclusion and its replacement with a system of refundable tax credits for the purchase of health insurance and medical services.     

Social health insurance and drug spending a mong cancer inpatients in China

A social health insurance(SHI) program has been established in China to ensure that people can obtain health care economically and equitably. Our analysis indicates that in 2005-06, 66.5 percent of Chinese citizens were non-SHI inpatients. We also found that drug spending for SHI inpatients was significantly higher than that for non-SHI inpatients. After adjusting for other variables, we found that the SHI coverage was also associated positively with higher drug costs. We present evidence to show that drug spending differences are attributable at least in part to differences in insurance courage.     

The health and cost effects of substituting home care for inpatient acute care: a review of the evidence

BACKGROUND: There is much interest in reducing hospital stays by providing some health care services in patients' homes. The authors review the evidence regarding the effects of this acute care at home (acute home care) on the health of patients and caregivers and on the social costs (public and private costs) of managing the patients' health conditions. METHODS: MEDLINE and HEALTHSTAR databases were searched for articles using the key term "home care." Bibliographies of articles read were checked for additional references. Fourteen studies met the selection criteria (publication between 1975 and early 1998, evaluation of an acute home care program for adults, and use of a control group to evaluate the program). Of the 14, only 4 also satisfied 6 internal validity criteria (patients were eligible for home care, comparable patients in home care group and hospital care group, adequate patient sample size, appropriate analytical techniques, appropriate health measures and appropriate costing methods). RESULTS: The 4 studies with internal validity evaluated home care for 5 specific health conditions (hip fracture, hip replacement, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], hysterectomy and knee replacement); 2 of the studies also evaluated home care for various medical and surgical conditions combined. Compared with hospital care, home care had no notable effects on patients' or caregivers' health. Social costs were not reported for hip fracture. They were unaffected for hip and knee replacement, and higher for COPD and hysterectomy; in the 2 studies of various conditions combined, social costs were higher in one and lower in the other. Effects on health system costs were mixed, with overall cost savings for hip fracture and higher costs for hip and knee replacement. INTERPRETATION: The limited existing evidence indicates that, compared with hospital care, acute home care produces no notable difference in health outcomes. The effects on social and health system costs appear to vary with condition. More well-designed evaluations are needed to determine the appropriate use of acute home care.     

Saying goodbye to Canada's single-payer system.

Cost shifting, in which governments transfer the cost of certain health care services to patients or private insurance companies, is increasing rapidly, and Dr. Christopher Carruthers thinks it will spell an end to Canada's single-payer system. The signs are already there: the private sector is offering more services and employers are keeping a closer eye on the health care system as they begin to pay a bigger share of the costs. The result, says Carruthers, is that government influence is bound to diminish as the private sector tries to fill voids created by governments that are trying to live within their fiscal means.     

Reinvention of health insurance in the consumer era

The private health insurance industry in the United States has fundamentally changed its strategic focus, product design, and pricing policy as a result of the backlash against managed care. Rather than seek to influence the behavior of physicians through capitation and utilization review, the major health plans now seek to influence the behavior of patients through benefit designs that cover a broad range of services but with high co-payments, tiered network designs that cover a broad range of physicians but with variable coinsurance, and medical management programs that provide incentives for patients to better manage their own health care. Premium prices are carefully adjusted to cover the expected costs of care for each type of product and each class of patient, with a commensurate willingness to abandon enrollment where insurance premiums cannot outrun medical costs. The contemporary product and pricing policies reflect a retreat by the insurance industry from previous efforts to transform the health care system and embody a delegation to individual consumers of responsibility for setting priorities and making financial tradeoffs.     

Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia: pattern of use and health care system costs

BACKGROUND: The use of mammography for screening asymptomatic women has increased dramatically in the past decade. This report describes the changes that have occurred in the use of bilateral mammography in British Columbia since the provincial breast cancer screening program began in 1988. METHODS: Using province-wide databases from both the breast cancer screening program and the provincial health insurance plan in BC, the authors determined the number and costs of bilateral mammography services for women aged 40 years or older between Apr. 1, 1986, and Mar. 31, 1997. Unilateral mammography was excluded because it is used for investigating symptomatic disease and screening abnormalities, and for follow-up of women who have undergone mastectomy for cancer. RESULTS: As the provincial breast cancer screening program expanded from 1 site in 1988 to 23 in 1997, it provided an increasing proportion of the bilateral mammographic examinations carried out each year in BC. In fiscal year 1996/97, 65% of bilateral mammographic examinations were performed through the screening program. The cost per examination within the screening program dropped as volume increased. Thirty percent more bilateral mammography examinations were done in 1996/97 than in 1991/92, but health care system expenditures for these services increased by only 4% during the same period. In calendar year 1996, 21% of new breast cancers were diagnosed as a result of a screening program visit. INTERPRETATION: Substantial increases in health care expenditures have been avoided by shifting bilateral mammography services to the provincial screening program, which has a lower cost per screening visit.     

The health care resource allocation debate. Defining our terms

The problem of health care distribution in the United States demands immediate action. Many different solutions have been proposed to slow rising health care costs and to improve access to care for the poor and uninsured. Debate among proponents of these various proposals might be advanced if a common language were adopted with regard to certain key terms instead of the various meanings currently assigned to these terms. For this reason, we propose and defend the following three definitions: (1) rationing is the societal toleration of inequitable access to health services acknowledged to be necessary by reference to necessary-care guidelines; (2) health care needs are desires for services that have been reasonably well demonstrated to provide significant net benefit for patients with specified clinical conditions; and (3) basic benefit plans are insurance packages that provide for all and only acknowledged health care needs, again by reference to appropriate clinical guidelines.     

Integrating cost awareness with ethics in the undergraduate medical curriculum

The challenge to train medical students in cost awareness regarding medical care led to a program at the Oregon Health Sciences University that integrates concern for costs with medical ethics. Cost awareness is a perspective that balances the physician's ethical obligations toward individual patients with their duties toward society whose pooled resources pay for medical services. The program integrates the subject of cost awareness into major required courses spanning the four-year curriculum. First-year students see costs in the context of an overview of social aspects of medical care. For second-year students, cost awareness is incorporated into training in basic clinical skills. Third- and fourth-year students are shown the bill for one of their patients and analyze their ward experiences from the perspective of resource utilization. Junior and senior students examine the impact of the legal system and professional ethics on health care costs. Elective course work on cost awareness is also available.