Comparing The Denmark Healthcare System And The Danish Healthcare Systems

Today Denmark is one of the most prosperous countries in the world. Unemployment rates are low. Denmark also has low inflation and a surplus on both balance of payments and public expenditure. The World Economic Forum’s 2008 competitiveness index ranks Denmark in its Top Three world-wide. And the World Transparency Index ranks it as the world champion in non-corruption. Furthermore it should be noted that other international comparisons nominate the Danes as the happiest people in the world! Denmark’s success is so impressive.

Health care systems are different in every country around the world. There are four main components that complete a health care delivery system, described by Shi and Singh (2015) as the quad-function model, which includes insurance, financing, payment and delivery of care (p. 5). Along with the components of the quad-function model it is important to analyze a countries access to care, their health outcomes and how public health is integrated into the health care delivery system. The United States has a unique health care system that is like no other country. Great Britian, in contrast, also has a unique system that is very different than the United States.

Looking at various systems around the world and how they came into existence provide useful comparisons and illuminate how different countries have responded to very similar needs of their citizens as well as how to mitigate limitations and marshal opportunities offered in the diversity of these systems (Johnson & Stoskopf, 2010). This paper analyzes several health systems

beginning of Sweden’s long history of providing medical care to all. In 1946, Sweden adopted a national health insurance program called The National Health Insurance Act. This act called for coverage for all citizens funded mainly by the government through local income tax revenue with control being in the hands of county governments. This includes providing dental care up until a person is 20. Not ideal, yet more than the United States government has been willing to implement. So why doesn’t The United States have universal health care for it’s tax paying citizens? The United States government has developed on the back of a different psychosocial mentality in comparison to Sweden. America was built upon the disposition and belief that

|Healthcare – A Framework for Local Action 2007; organisational policies, local and regional guidelines for |

Is it possible for two countries which are thousands of kilometers away from each other to have some similarities in their health care system? Health care system is one of the most important and fundamental sectors in any country or region all around the world. Many countries pour a major amount of their overall income to support the health care system. And the main reason behind this tremendous effort provided by the countries all around the world for the health care system is that each country wants to provide a good and high standard health care services for all the population occupying the land whether they were local citizens or Non- local citizens . This essay will compare and contrast the health care system in two wonderful countries:

The purpose of this paper is to compare the Canadian and the United States health care system. the first part of the paper will focus on describing each country health care system. The second part will focus on analyzing, evaluating and comparing these two countries system efficiency and benefits. The last part, is an overview of the recent policies changes and its effect (positive and negative) on each country citizens and proposed future reforms for better coverage in these countries.

With the focus on these five areas, Governments in each country are creating health systems that aim to provide services that are affordable, equitable and accessible. To achieve a sustainable health system, cooperation and participation of all health care providers is vital. This will work towards WHO’s goal of achieving “better health for all”

In this paper, there will be a comparative analysis to the United States (U.S.) healthcare system and Canadians healthcare system highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of both.

The Danes value quality healthcare and it is paid for through income taxes. Healthcare activity and outcomes are decided at a county and municipal level. They have two sectors of care. The sectors include primary care and hospital care ("The Danish Health Care System," n.d.). Total expenditure on health in 2014 was 10.8 percent. In addition the total expenditure on health in 2014 per capita was 4,782 ("Countries Denmark," 2015).

In any country, external forces can influence or shape the basic character of a healthcare delivery system (Shi, 2015). These forces consist of political climate of a nation, economic development, technological processes, social and cultural values, physical environment, population characteristics such as demographic and health trends, global

The Danish government spent 9.5% of its GDP on Healthcare in 2006, whereas only 0.19% of the GDP was spent on Oral Health in the same year (Kravitz & Treasure, 2009). The government pays approximately 85% of the national costs of health care, while the remaining 15% come from individuals through co payments for treatments (Kravitz & Treasure, 2009). However, for dental care it’s almost the opposite, government only funds 20% of the national cost for adult dental services and the remaining 80% is paid by the dentist (Kravitz & Treasure, 2009).

The healthcare system of Ukraine is in major need of development, even with minimal improvement. In the previous years, health outcomes have remained low, resulting in an average life expectation 11 years less than other Europeans (World Bank 2015). Ukraine gives universal access to healthcare to all of its citizens and is financed by the government through general taxation (Lekhan 2015). The state covers most medical services such as treatment by specialists, hospitalization, and prescription drugs. Dependent family members are covered by the contributions of employed family members and those who are self-employed must get additional insurance to cover their family (Lekhan 2015). The Ministry of Health is responsible for overseeing the health system at the national level and regional health authorities are responsible for the implementation of health policies within their respective territories (Lekhan 2015). Despite the presence of regional health authorities and some progress towards decentralization, the central government still has control over most resources as well as the hospital management system (Lennon 2016).

Denmark's many natural resources, proximity to distribution centers and the ability to act as a centralized logistics hub, in addition to its economic and political stability, make this nation one of the best to launch a new business in. It is also based on a constitutional monarchy with a judicial system that is comparable to the U.S. in that there are three branches of government. There is an executive, legislative and judicial branch of the government, acting with comparable balance of power as the U.S. as well. All of these elements of their governmental structure make the country one of the most open to Foreign Direct Investment as well (Atkins, 2012). The country is currently indexing is currency, the Danish krone, to the European Union euro. This has led to the stabilization of their balance of payments throughout Europe, and also opened up the opportunity for the country to join the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) (Atkins, 2012). The country's leaders voted against it, citing their relative strength to the weakness of other EU nations, and the potential that their economy could be adversely affected by too much shared debt. Their insights were prescient, as the current economic state of the EU shows. Denmark has been able to mitigate the effects of the debt crisis in Europe by taking a more measured, controlled approach to how much of their currency the lend to struggling

Everyone in Sweden has equal access to health care services under a largely decentralized, taxpayer-funded system (Swedish Institute 2014). The health care system in Sweden is financed primarily through taxes levied by county councils and municipalities. Sweden 's health care system is organized and managed on three levels: national, regional and local. At the national level, the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs establishes principles and guidelines for care and sets the political agenda for health and medical care. At the regional level, responsibility for financing and providing health care is decentralized to the county councils. A county council is a political body whose representatives are elected by the public every four years on the same day as the national general election. At the local level, municipalities are responsible for maintaining the immediate environment of citizens such as water supply and social welfare services (Swedish Institute 2014). Costs for health and medical care amount to approximately nine percent of Sweden’s gross domestic product (GDP), a figure that has remained fairly stable since the early 1980s. Seventy-one percent of health care is funded through local taxation, and county councils have the right to collect income tax. The state finances the bulk of health care costs, with the patient paying a small nominal fee for examination. The state pays for approximately ninety seven percent of medical costs (InterNations 2014). In 1733, the