August 24, 2009

5 Myths About Health Care Around the World

Washintonpost.com - As Americans search for the cure to what ails our health-care system, we’ve overlooked an invaluable source of ideas and solutions: the rest of the world. All the other industrialized democracies have faced problems like ours, yet they’ve found ways to cover everybody — and still spend far less than we do.

I’ve traveled the world from Oslo to Osaka to see how other developed democracies provide health care. Instead of dismissing these models as "socialist," we could adapt their solutions to fix our problems. To do that, we first have to dispel a few myths about health care abroad:

1. It’s all socialized medicine out there.

Not so. Some countries, such as Britain, New Zealand and Cuba, do provide health care in government hospitals, with the government paying the bills. Others — for instance, Canada and Taiwan — rely on private-sector providers, paid for by government-run insurance. But many wealthy countries — including Germany, the Netherlands, Japan and Switzerland — provide universal coverage using private doctors, private hospitals and private insurance plans.

In some ways, health care is less "socialized" overseas than in the United States. Almost all Americans sign up for government insurance (Medicare) at age 65. In Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands, seniors stick with private insurance plans for life. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is one of the planet’s purest examples of government-run health care.

2. Overseas, care is rationed through limited choices or long lines.

Generally, no. Germans can sign up for any of the nation’s 200 private health insurance plans — a broader choice than any American has. If a German doesn’t like her insurance company, she can switch to another, with no increase in premium. The Swiss, too, can choose any insurance plan in the country.

In France and Japan, you don’t get a choice of insurance provider; you have to use the one designated for your company or your industry. But patients can go to any doctor, any hospital, any traditional healer. There are no U.S.-style limits such as "in-network" lists of doctors or "pre-authorization" for surgery. You pick any doctor, you get treatment — and insurance has to pay.

Canadians have their choice of providers. In Austria and Germany, if a doctor diagnoses a person as "stressed," medical insurance pays for weekends at a health spa.

As for those notorious waiting lists, some countries are indeed plagued by them. Canada makes patients wait weeks or months for nonemergency care, as a way to keep costs down. But studies by the Commonwealth Fund and others report that many nations — Germany, Britain, Austria — outperform the United States on measures such as waiting times for appointments and for elective surgeries.

In Japan, waiting times are so short that most patients don’t bother to make an appointment. One Thursday morning in Tokyo, I called the prestigious orthopedic clinic at Keio University Hospital to schedule a consultation about my aching shoulder. "Why don’t you just drop by?" the receptionist said. That same afternoon, I was in the surgeon’s office. Dr. Nakamichi recommended an operation. "When could we do it?" I asked. The doctor checked his computer and said, "Tomorrow would be pretty difficult. Perhaps some day next week?"

3. Foreign health-care systems are inefficient, bloated bureaucracies.

Much less so than here. It may seem to Americans that U.S.-style free enterprise — private-sector, for-profit health insurance — is naturally the most cost-effective way to pay for health care. But in fact, all the other payment systems are more efficient than ours.

U.S. health insurance companies have the highest administrative costs in the world; they spend roughly 20 cents of every dollar for nonmedical costs, such as paperwork, reviewing claims and marketing. France’s health insurance industry, in contrast, covers everybody and spends about 4 percent on administration. Canada’s universal insurance system, run by government bureaucrats, spends 6 percent on administration. In Taiwan, a leaner version of the Canadian model has administrative costs of 1.5 percent; one year, this figure ballooned to 2 percent, and the opposition parties savaged the government for wasting money.

The world champion at controlling medical costs is Japan, even though its aging population is a profligate consumer of medical care. On average, the Japanese go to the doctor 15 times a year, three times the U.S. rate. They have twice as many MRI scans and X-rays. Quality is high; life expectancy and recovery rates for major diseases are better than in the United States. And yet Japan spends about $3,400 per person annually on health care; the United States spends more than $7,000.

4. Cost controls stifle innovation.

False. The United States is home to groundbreaking medical research, but so are other countries with much lower cost structures. Any American who’s had a hip or knee replacement is standing on French innovation. Deep-brain stimulation to treat depression is a Canadian breakthrough. Many of the wonder drugs promoted endlessly on American television, including Viagra, come from British, Swiss or Japanese labs.

Overseas, strict cost controls actually drive innovation. In the United States, an MRI scan of the neck region costs about $1,500. In Japan, the identical scan costs $98. Under the pressure of cost controls, Japanese researchers found ways to perform the same diagnostic technique for one-fifteenth the American price. (And Japanese labs still make a profit.)

5. Health insurance has to be cruel.

Not really. American health insurance companies routinely reject applicants with a "preexisting condition" — precisely the people most likely to need the insurers’ service. They employ armies of adjusters to deny claims. If a customer is hit by a truck and faces big medical bills, the insurer’s "rescission department" digs through the records looking for grounds to cancel the policy, often while the victim is still in the hospital. The companies say they have to do this stuff to survive in a tough business.

Foreign health insurance companies, in contrast, must accept all applicants, and they can’t cancel as long as you pay your premiums. The plans are required to pay any claim submitted by a doctor or hospital (or health spa), usually within tight time limits. The big Swiss insurer Groupe Mutuel promises to pay all claims within five days. "Our customers love it," the group’s chief executive told me. The corollary is that everyone is mandated to buy insurance, to give the plans an adequate pool of rate-payers.

The key difference is that foreign health insurance plans exist only to pay people’s medical bills, not to make a profit. The United States is the only developed country that lets insurance companies profit from basic health coverage.

In many ways, foreign health-care models are not really "foreign" to America, because our crazy-quilt health-care system uses elements of all of them. For Native Americans or veterans, we’re Britain: The government provides health care, funding it through general taxes, and patients get no bills. For people who get insurance through their jobs, we’re Germany: Premiums are split between workers and employers, and private insurance plans pay private doctors and hospitals. For people over 65, we’re Canada: Everyone pays premiums for an insurance plan run by the government, and the public plan pays private doctors and hospitals according to a set fee schedule. And for the tens of millions without insurance coverage, we’re Burundi or Burma: In the world’s poor nations, sick people pay out of pocket for medical care; those who can’t pay stay sick or die.

This fragmentation is another reason that we spend more than anybody else and still leave millions without coverage. All the other developed countries have settled on one model for health-care delivery and finance; we’ve blended them all into a costly, confusing bureaucratic mess.

Which, in turn, punctures the most persistent myth of all: that America has "the finest health care" in the world. We don’t. In terms of results, almost all advanced countries have better national health statistics than the United States does. In terms of finance, we force 700,000 Americans into bankruptcy each year because of medical bills. In France, the number of medical bankruptcies is zero. Britain: zero. Japan: zero. Germany: zero.

Given our remarkable medical assets — the best-educated doctors and nurses, the most advanced hospitals, world-class research — the United States could be, and should be, the best in the world. To get there, though, we have to be willing to learn some lessons about health-care administration from the other industrialized democracies.

T.R. Reid, a former Washington Post reporter, is the author of "The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care," to be published Monday.

By T.R. Reid
Sunday, August 23, 2009

August 2, 2009

The Importance Of Cleanliness In Good Health

The subject of cleanliness has been discussed from all angles for many years. Arguments against, as well as for, have been presented with various degrees of effectiveness. It was not so long ago that washing the whole body was considered a sin and a shame, and bath-tubs were originally introduced in spite of protests from the sanitarians.

The pendulum has now swung too far in the other direction. Cleanliness is sometimes claimed to be the means of prevention and cure of almost all kinds of diseases. Health Departments are often required to spend a great deal of time and money on municipal housekeeping such as street cleaning and collection of refuse. Expense of this kind should not be charged up to health work as there is very slight chance that disease can be prevented in this way.

On the other hand, cleanliness in the form of pure water, pasteurized milk from inspected dairies, fresh food from sanitary kitchens and stores—handled by people free from communicable disease—all have a real effect upon the public health.

Personal cleanliness is very much a matter of personal choice. There are certain social standards that most of us prefer to measure up to, but small habits are those most likely to affect health. Keeping the hands clean probably does more to promote our own health and prevent spreading disease to others than all the other types of personal cleanliness put together. Children can be directed toward the clean hands habit with effective results from an early age.

By: Roberta Frost, Ph.D.
Source: http://www.PopularArticles.com/article154815.html

February 11, 2009

The Many Benefits Of An Integrated RIS PACS System In The Medical Field

The Many Benefits Of An Integrated RIS PACS System In The Medical Field
    
Published: January 9, 2009

Technology is constantly changing.  These changes are affecting the medical world at an incredible rate.  Nowhere else are these changes more evident than in the radiology field.  Constant upgrades to technology has led to increased awareness of what’s going on in our bodies with new CT scans or from the sharing of patient information through the use of a PACS viewer or a mammography viewer

Radiology Information System and Picture Archiving and Communications system, also referred to as a RIS PACS system, allows medical offices and hospitals to easily and more importantly, quickly share diagnostic imaging information, reports and images electronically through either a PACS web viewer or a regular PACS viewer.  This technology greatly reduces the need for film in diagnostic imaging.

A simple way to define RIS PACS is as a computerized information system which allows for electronic scheduling, storage and organization of diagnostic imaging and patient information.  A PACS viewer can also manage imaging workflow, workload and billing information.  These machines minimize the need for paper-based transactions and all kinds of film images. A mammography viewer, for example, provides patient information to a mammography workstation so that the correct images are associated with the correct patient.

A PACS viewer can store X-rays and other diagnostic images.  They reduce the need for film while also facilitating quick access to patient images and reports.

Benefits for Patients
•    A PACS web viewer vastly improves a health care provider’s access to patient’s images and reports.
•    Medical professionals also experience a reduced number of duplicate images since prior results are available electronically as a for support health care providers when making diagnosis and treatment decisions.

Benefits for Health Care Providers
•    An integrated PACS viewer works to eliminate the emphasis on where a test is performed since all results are shared electronically with other facilities.  A PACS web viewer is a perfect example of how information can be shared through the internet.
•    Radiologists, referring physicians and clinicians now can access a chronological view of a patient’s radiology history.

Benefits for Administrative Personnel
•    A PACS viewer greatly improves the management and storage of diagnostic resources and wait lists alike.
•    It slashes costs related to the managing of film and tests previously affected by lack of access to relevant priors, or lost films.

The integration of a mammography viewer into a hospital or medical office brings with it substantial improvements in work efficiency.  Understanding what is possible with a new mammography workstation not only helps a doctor or physician find the right solution to a problem, but can also be a good prognostic indicator of your future fight against potentially deadly diseases. As you can see, these changes in technology are a good thing.

By: Wayne Hemrick
Article Source: www.PopularArticles.com

February 4, 2009

The Importance Of Cleanliness In Good Health

The subject of cleanliness has been discussed from all angles for many years. Arguments against, as well as for, have been presented with various degrees of effectiveness. It was not so long ago that washing the whole body was considered a sin and a shame, and bath-tubs were originally introduced in spite of protests from the sanitarians.

The pendulum has now swung too far in the other direction. Cleanliness is sometimes claimed to be the means of prevention and cure of almost all kinds of diseases. Health Departments are often required to spend a great deal of time and money on municipal housekeeping such as street cleaning and collection of refuse. Expense of this kind should not be charged up to health work as there is very slight chance that disease can be prevented in this way.

On the other hand, cleanliness in the form of pure water, pasteurized milk from inspected dairies, fresh food from sanitary kitchens and stores—handled by people free from communicable disease—all have a real effect upon the public health.

Personal cleanliness is very much a matter of personal choice. There are certain social standards that most of us prefer to measure up to, but small habits are those most likely to affect health. Keeping the hands clean probably does more to promote our own health and prevent spreading disease to others than all the other types of personal cleanliness put together. Children can be directed toward the clean hands habit with effective results from an early age.

Article Source: www.PopularArticles.com

September 1, 2008

Weight Loss and Cholesterol Tips

Weight Loss and Cholesterol Tips

    * Butter Vs. Margarine: Which Is More Heart-Healthy?

      Okay, we’ll give you the straight facts and we won’t butter anything up for you. Although there are advocates of both butter and margarine, most cardiologists agree that if you have heart disease or are at risk and you are following a diet for high cholesterol, certain types of margarine are better for your heart than butter. Because margarine is made from vegetable oils, it contains no cholesterol. Butter is made from milk, which is an animal protein source, so it does contain cholesterol. Butter also contains saturated fat. But all margarines are not created equal. Many margarines are made from hydrogenated vegetable oil, which means that they contain trans fats; exactly what you want to avoid on a low cholesterol diet. Look for tub margarine rather than stick margarine. In general, the more solid the margarine is, the more trans fat it contains. Look for spreadable tub margarine with three grams or less of total fat, including both saturated fat and trans fat amounts. Are you a baker? Opt for butter. Not only is it heart-healthier than stick margarine, it gives your baked goods more flavor, which makes it easier to perform other low-fat substitutions in recipes

    * Check Your Cholesterol At Age 20

(more…)