Did You Know?
allnurses is the largest community for nurses on the web. We now have over 385,848 members! Join today to network with other nurses, laugh, share, and much more.
| No. 10 |
Jun 30, 2009, 08:50 PM
Re: Private insurance, most efficient , cost effective funding of Healthcare ?
Our government has just spent trillions of dollars that we don't have. Now they are printing new dollars at an alarming rate. This is the model of efficiency that some people want at the helm of our healthcare system? Heh. They way things are going in Washington, we will likely have bigger problems than healthcare funding. Soon.
| | Advertisement Sponsored Links | | | | No. 11 |
Jul 02, 2009, 01:29 PM
Re: Private insurance, most efficient , cost effective funding of Healthcare ? CDC: Private health care coverage at 50-year-low The percentage of Americans with private health insurance has hit its lowest mark in 50 years, according to two new government reports. About 65 percent of non-elderly Americans had private insurance in 2008, down from 67 percent the year before, according to preliminary data released Wednesday by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"It's bad news," said Kenneth Thorpe, a health policy researcher at Emory University.
In the 1970s and early 1980s, nearly 80 percent of Americans had private coverage, according to CDC officials.
Some experts blamed the faltering economy and corporate decisions to raise health insurance premiums — or do away with employee coverage — as the main drivers of the recent data. They say coverage statistics for 2009 may look even worse.
However, public coverage of adults is rising in some states, due to programs like Medicaid expanding eligibility. So not all the adults without private coverage are uninsured, Thorpe said.
Indeed, the CDC estimated that about 44 million Americans were uninsured last year — nearly the same as CDC estimates for other recent years.
The CDC is one of at least three U.S. agencies that estimate the number of Americans without health insurance.
The U.S. Census Bureau puts out what is perhaps the best-known number, but that agency's 2008 estimate is not due out until August.
Like the Census Bureau, the CDC's estimate is based on a survey. The CDC interviewed about 75,000 Americans last year, asking if they were uninsured at the time. About 15 percent said yes, leading to the estimate that about 44 million Americans were uninsured.
The drop in non-elderly adults with private health insurance was statistically significant, but the drop in children without private coverage was not. Health officials noted that public coverage of children has risen dramatically in the last ten years, and now more than one in three children are covered by a public plan.
The CDC also reported on insurance coverage in the 20 largest states, and found the percent of uninsured people ranged from 3 percent in Massachusetts to 23 percent in Texas. Lack of health insurance was greatest in the South and West.
Private coverage rates for people under age 65 ranged from 79 percent in Massachusetts to 56 percent in Florida, the CDC reported. | | No. 13 |
Jul 02, 2009, 03:38 PM
Re: Private insurance, most efficient , cost effective funding of Healthcare ?
Interesting article from todays star tribune about alleged efficiency of the private sector for delivery of services to the public: Everywhere we look it is the private, not the public, that has proven bloated, inefficient and corrupt.
A recent BBC investigation revealed that private military contractors in Iraq had "lost, stolen, or not properly accounted for" at least $23 billion in taxpayer funds.
A few months ago, Chicago privatized its public parking meters and the cost of an hour of parking promptly rose by 200 percent!
In the 1960s, when Canada shifted to a single public health insurer from a system dominated by private companies, per capita health care costs in Canada were about the same as they were in the United States. Today, Canada's public health system delivers first-rate health care to all Canadians for far less than our private system costs to provide care for less than 80 percent of Americans.
at http://www.startribune.com/opinion/c...7PQLanchO7DiUr
We have seen the same cost inflation phenomenon in health care. Further on in the article it describes how giving a public vs. private sector choice option has resulted in better services at lower cost for garbage collection and electricity. Health care is a similar industry We all need health care just like we need sanitation and electricity services.
| | No. 14 |
Jul 02, 2009, 04:14 PM
Re: Private insurance, most efficient , cost effective funding of Healthcare ? Originally Posted by wowza [b]
5) VA patients had more records and more visits. It took one and a hlaf times longer to go through the VA pts' charts. This is a major confounder. The authors also admit to this. Also VA patients also go to a single location. Easier follow up, less switching doctors etc. This also skews the data
From personal experience at the VA and a major university hospital, I can tell you that there is an incredible difference in the kind of care you get in the hospital at the VA compared to the other university hospital. And it's not just me. I have not heard a single medical student, resident or physician who works at both systems say they view the care to be better at the VA. I have heard probably 50 times just this year just how slowly things move and how the care just isnt as good at the VA.
I agree that the preventative health care that you get at the VA is much better than nothing. But if every system worked like the VA we would just be bringing good parts of our health care system down to the lowest common denomenator.
Perhaps though, just the VA that I work at sucks
Medical homes do lead to better average care which I think ou are acknowledging. I think anyone can tear a study down on research design issues without looking for the deeper truths. If anything I think of VA hospitals as the canary in the coal mine for health care in any region. If the care is good for the population in a geographic area as a whole than the VA hospital will be good. If care is poor or access is difficult the VA system in that area will struggle as well. The deeper truth is just that. If we improve access/quality than care as a whole improves.
I just came back from DEMPS training last week. One of lessons brought back was that Federal Medical Station care (staffed by VA volunteers) was usually superior to the care that the patients had received in their local area and the patients did not want to leave the care environment.
Is citing a complaint of a provider really a valid way to see truths? Anecdotal evidence is not a particularly good way to discern system performance. (I agree that there are care gaps for dental/podiatry but those are issues that need to be worked on at a system level. On the other hand I think primary care does work reasonably well.) CPRS constantly prompts and reminds us what health assessments are due/overdue.
If anything we should always be asking how can we improve system performance? Always assuming that the public system is ineffective is just as invalid as assuming that the private sector always works better.
| | No. 15 |
Jul 05, 2009, 11:45 AM
Re: Private insurance, most efficient , cost effective funding of Healthcare ? Greed and Sleaze or Choice and Freedom
By Donna Smith
Ah, Independence Day. We Americans love our freedom and our freedom to choose. But when it comes to our healthcare system, it seems we’ve forgotten that our choices are most limited and our freedom most restricted under the broken, for-profit, private health insurance model that has been outdoing itself on greed and sleaze for decades.
Kids, women, all non-white ethnic groups, seniors, sick folks – all of these groups have been among those discriminated against by the high-cost, high-profit U.S. healthcare system. Periodically when the abuses became just too egregious politically and socially, our government would struggle to put programs in place to address the disparities and quiet the storm.
But profits must be paid under this system, and Americans are not free to choose either their doctors or their treatments when the bottom line is the top priority. ...
...After paying the $17, Thomas’ mom was told they’d have to have a credit card on file before services for her own lab work could be rendered, and she signed a paper giving the lab permission to charge the card if insurance didn't pay. What should she do? Risk that Thomas will need a test and have it stopped like my husband’s was, as he was being treated for heart attack?
Nope. These are equal opportunity greed and sleaze mongers… 5 year olds and grandpas alike. Money talks. Pay in advance and live.
I guess we could see this coming – first we all have to pay co-pays and deductibles in advance of receiving any care or treatment at all and now we’ll have to have credit cards and deposits on file to anticipate future needs.
Yet I keep hearing this asinine talk about single payer healthcare putting bureaucrats in-between patients and their providers. Come on. Public funding and private delivery does not put more people between me and my docs – it strips folks with purely profit motivations away from the relationship. ... http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/...ce-and-freedom | | No. 19 |
Jul 15, 2009, 02:07 PM
Re: Private insurance, most efficient , cost effective funding of Healthcare ? Originally Posted by cwazycwissyRN
I wish we could ( on both sides of this debate ) find unbiased sources to go over ( factually ) what this plan is . If as some may argue the plan is not fully formed , remember we are at present discussing what may be
, and will omly be able to debate the reality when it is presented .
As to the above sources , I think it would be very hard to view them as unbiased ( GOP and Fox )!
| | 331 members
3,380 guests 3,711 | 12 | | | 8 | | | 15 | | | 23 | | | 6 | | | 24 | | | 64 | | | 90 | | | 12 | | | 17 | | | 7 | | | 0 | | | 7 | | | 15 | | | 11 | | | 13 | | | 16 | | | 29 | | | 14 | | | 16 | | | 23 | | | 17 | | | 23 | | | 10 | | | 6 | | |
Nursing News