Comparison Between The Uk And Uk Healthcare Systems

Their aims are to aid people who are applicable to use their service. They are non-profit and are Governmental, which means that the Government funds the NHS by using a portion tax-payers’ money.

The National Health System began in 1948 with the aim to provide free health care for the English thus removing health access inequities. This essay considers two strengths of the NHS, being free health and locally responsive health care and two weaknesses being the financial burden and unprecedented pressure on health care resources.

The (NHS) the National Health Service in uk was launched in 1948. (History of the NHS time line 2014). The idea was that good health care should be available to all regardless of wealth.

The United States (U.S) healthcare system is a large private system that consist of multiple payers, which leaves the U.S

The following paper is based on the differences between two healthcare systems in two different countries, these systems are the Australian healthcare system which is Medicare, and England’s National health system which is known as the NHS.

The National health services (NHS) provides a comprehensive healthcare services across the entire nation. It is considered to be UK’s proudest institution, and is envied by many other countries because of its free of cost health delivery to its population. Nevertheless, it is often seen as a ‘political football’ as it affects all of us in some way and hence everyone carry an opinion about it (Cass, 2006). Factors such as government policies, funding, number of service users, taxation etc all make up small parts of this large complex organisation. Therefore, any imbalances within one sector can pose a substantial risk on the overall NHS (Wheeler & Grice, 2000). This essay will discuss whether the NHS aim of reducing the nations need

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.

It also proposed a national health service that would be free of charge and available to all. In 1948 Aneurin Bevan launched the NHS “The NHS was created out of the ideal that good healthcare should be available to all, regardless of wealth.” (nhs.uk). The core principles of the NHS were that it should meet the needs of everyone, be free at the point of delivery and be based on the need for treatment rather than the ability to pay. The NHS provided a completely free service until 1951 when fees for prescriptions, dental treatments and eye treatments were introduced, today the service still remains free to use and the fees for such things are something that can be squashed if you are above or below a certain age or in receipt of a particular benefit. Becoming a welfare state meant that there was now a minimum standard of living that each person in Britain should not fall below with benefits being issued for unemployment, sickness, retirement and maternity on the basis that everyone contributes to

One factor to longer life expectancy and better health throughout the UK however there may be a divide, is that the government introduced the NHS in 1984.

To get my health care reform started, the basic format of Britain’s National Health Service will be followed. It will feature large tax-based financing to fund

The NHS provides many benefits to its residents in the UK. Specific benefits include the cost, care and coverage of the system.

The National Health Service (NHS) was planned as a three-tier structure. With the Minister of Health at the top and below were the three tiers designed to interact with each other to suit the needs of the patient. These tiers were voluntary and municipal hospitals supervised by Regional hospital boards, family doctors, dentists, opticians and pharmacists who were self-employed professionals contracted to the NHS to provide services so that patients did not pay directly and local health authorities like community clinics that provided services such as immunisations, maternity care and school medical services controlled by a local authority Medical Health. The NHS in England is undergoing some big changes, most of which took effect on April 1 2013. This included the abolition of primary care trusts (PCTs) and strategic health authorities (SHAs), and the introduction of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and Health watch England.

The United Kingdom utilizes a national health service. This service is government owned and controlled. Most practitioners are employees of the government and hospitals are government run. Taxes provide nearly 80% of the funding for their health program. The remainders of the cost are covered by employee and employer contributions. Most providers and hospitals are public, although there is a small but growing private sector. The citizens of the United Kingdom pay nothing for visits to their physician or hospital stays. They also can choose which providers they want to visit and have “good access to primary care” (Hohman, 2006). The United Kingdom ranked number 18 in overall healthcare (WHO 2000) while spending only 8.4% of its gross domestic product (Kaiser EDU). In a recent poll, 79% of UK citizens “agreed that the NHS provided them with good service” (Health Science Journal, 2009).

Residents of the UK have the right to receive NHS services without having to pay for them. Currently the only exceptions are prescriptions (in England) and dental treatment, where entitlement is based on age and income.

In line with the majority of other developed countries, the United Kingdom (UK) has offered its citizens a universal health care system that is free at the point of service. Funded primarily by taxation, the system is popular and efficient. However, along with most other health care systems around the world, it faces a series of challenges if it is to maintain viability, in the twenty-first century. These issues include; long waiting times, an aging population, funding challenges and the increasing cost of technology.