National Health Care Reform: A Case Study

Technology is being used everywhere in the world. For example, technology is used to make cars, clothes, eye glasses, to teach and now it is utilized in health care every day. Technology plays a major role in the health care reform Act to reduce costs, improve access, and save lives. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , and its constitutionality ruling by the United States Supreme Court last June 28, 2012, mandates requiring all electronic medical records for all health care agencies in 2014 ( Jha, 2013, p 1628) . David Blumenthal (2009) surveyed all acute care hospitals in the American Hospital Association and found only 1.5% of U.S. Hospitals have comprehensive electronic medical records system. Also included in the Patient

I will compare the current health care system with the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) that became law on March 23, 2010.   The current system, which is being phased out between 2011 and 2018 is increasingly inaccessible to many poor and lower-middle-class people. About 47 million Americans lack health insurance, an increase of more than two million people from 2005 (Rover, 2011) the increasingly complex warfare between insurers and hospitals over who pays the bills is gobbling up a great deal of money and the end result is that the United States pays roughly twice as much per

America spends 2.5 times more on healthcare than most developed countries yet still ranking 51st in life expectancy in the world (Baum, 2015). The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was implemented January 1, 2014 by President Obama to expand coverage to millions of individuals in need. It consists of two separate pieces of legislation: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Centers for Medicaid and Medicaid Services, 2016). Although the ACA will give health benefits to millions of uninsured Americans, hospitals are receiving less compensation because of the high demand of health care from over qualified recipients. Through the Children’s Health Insurance Program and also the Social Security Act, states are able to pilot a test approach that could extend coverage up to 200 percent of the poverty line (Sommers, Kenney, & Epstein, 2015). Such a large increase in the size of the population that is now eligible to apply for the ACA comes with a sizable amount of fiscal responsibility from the states and puts an immense strain on the amount of money guaranteed to pay for the services provided (Sonier et al., 2013). Given the lack of funding from the Medicaid program, absence of reimbursement strategies, and budget of healthcare in America’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP),

America faces a choice, keep The Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, or scrap it and come up with something better. The ACA in its entirety leaves room for improvement. It could do better, much better, if it weren’t for matters of political expediency. Currently the United States spends more on health care than any other country. According to a Huffington Post article (2013) the U.S. spends about 17.2 percent of their GDP on medical care. Health care per capita is approximately $8,608, second only to Switzerland, which spends $9,121.

In 2010 during the term of President Barack Obama something needed to be done due to the rise of healthcare costs and the number of people who were uninsured and unable to pay their healthcare bills (ehealthinsurance 2014). United States spent more on healthcare than any other country but yet was only the 34th in life expectancy. These are some of the many reasons why The Affordable Care Act came about and was signed into a health care law. This landmark law impacted and changed many aspects of the healthcare system, as well as influenced everyone’s healthcare options in the United States. The Affordable Care Act has been just about been one of the most

In the first quarter of 2016 the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) legislation has lead to 20 million Americans gaining healthcare coverage, and a record low uninsured rate of 8.6 percent (U. S. Department of Health & Human Services [DHHS], 2016). Yet the verdict is out on whether the PPACA has been an improvement or a liability holding back the United States (US) healthcare system’s potential. The legislation was first integrated as a guide to the US healthcare system when it was signed by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010 (Rosenbaum, 2011). It planned to fulfill goals of improving access, affordability, and quality in healthcare (U. S. Department of Health & Human Services [DHHS], 2015). Full implementation of the healthcare reform was established on January 1, 2014, marking the start of individual and employer responsibility provisions, state health insurance exchanges, Medicaid expansions, and individual and small-employer group subsidies (Rosenbaum, 2011). As a whole the PPACA intended to “reframe the financial relationship between Americans and the health-care system to stem the health insurance crisis that has enveloped individuals, families, communities, the health-care system, and the national economy” (Rosenbaum, p. 131, para. 2). While the legislation has not fully

In 2014, the US entered into the force sensational health care reform of the protection of patients in the United States, which is called The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Under this reform, all the citizens and residents of the country are required to have health insurance. It has also caused many discussions and opinions among people. Supporters of it say that this is a significant step forward, since there is no company that can refuse a person in the insurance policy. However, opponents believe that this reform will only worsen the condition of the Americans. The current health care reform has its drawbacks, such as increased fees for insurance, and the impossibility of choice, therefore, it is necessary for change.

In the beginning of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the “healthcare system” was left in the hands of the states, which the states handed off to private and voluntary programs to deal with. In the presidential term of Teddy Roosevelt, 1901-1909, he felt that “no country could be strong whose people were sick and poor.” (Palmer 1999) He did however back health insurance as a whole. Roosevelt was not the one fighting for the health care though, there were outside forces that impacted health care. The American Association of Labor Legislation (AALL) led the campaign for health insurance. They drafted their first bill by 1915. This bill wanted to limit the coverage toward the working class and anyone who earned less than $1,200 a year including dependents. The American Medical Association (AMA) backed this bill because they felt the same way about coverage. The AMA did not speak for all doctors and those who opposed this backing spoke up. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) opposed the bill because they felt that it would weaken the unions and they wanted to maintain their strength. The private insurance

Health care in the United States is driven by a patchwork of services and financing. Americans access health care services in a variety of ways — from private physicians’ offices, to public hospitals, to safety-net providers. This diverse network of health care providers is supported by an equally diverse set of funding streams. The United States spends almost twice as much on health care as any other country, topping $2 trillion each year. (WHO.INT 2000) However, even with overall spending amounting to more than $7,400 per person, millions of individuals cannot access the health care services they need.(Foundation 2009) So when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (a.k.a the Affordable Care Act or ACA) was passed in the summer

There are Currently 32 million people without health insurance in the United States. This means that roughly 83 per cent of citizens have to live day by day hoping they won’t get sick. For this reason, President Obama signed the U.S health reform bill into law. The health reform will make health care more affordable for citizens. Employers with more than 50 employees will be forced to provide coverage for all, or they will have to pay a fine. It will also make health insures more responsible. For example, health insurance carriers are forbidden from placing lifetime dollar limits on policies, from denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions, and from canceling policies because someone gets sick. It will also expand

The Frieden (2010) article suggests that in order to get long lasting results to resolve a health care matter, the intervention should include a variety of levels from the Health Impact pyramid. The bottom tiers of the pyramid tend to have the greatest impact. However, they are often harder to implement and can be controversial, at times (e.g. sugar tax). Therefore, by combining policies, from the changing the context tier and programs from the tops tiers this will help the community to understand reasoning behind policy change as well as receive the resources and support to change health behavior.

If we look back at history, we can see the need for health care transformation. During the presidential campaign in 1912, Theodore Roosevelt has been quoted “No country can be strong if its people are sick and poor” (Houle & Fleece, 2011, para. 29). Although he was defeated, this triggered the deliberation as to how to best make available healthcare to the people (Houle & Fleece, 2011). In Europe, the social norm was to have Universal Health Insurance and they endorsed social welfare programs (“History of health care reform in the United States”). Because of this, progressives wanted the same program here in America (“History of health care reform in the United States”). In 1943 the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill with the purpose to ratify required insurance in the United States (Houle & Fleece, 2011). The Bill, however at the time did not pass because of the lack of support from President

The implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), popularly known as “Obamacare”, has drastically altered healthcare in America. The goal of this act was to give Americans access to affordable, high quality insurance while simultaneously decreasing overall healthcare spending. The ACA had intended to maximize health care coverage throughout the United States, but this lofty ambition resulted in staggeringly huge financial and human costs.

Since families that go to St. Jude for treatment never receives a bill, some felt that this healthcare reform would threaten the tax-exempt status for this hospital. According to Carrie Strehlau, a spokesperson for St. Jude, “the implementation of the healthcare reform would not impact the way St. Jude provide care” (Scurlock, 2013). She goes on to say that “St. Jude would not have a problem meeting all of the ACA’s requirements” (Scurlock, 2013). Even though, St. Jude doesn’t anticipate any fines, they are still required to do a community needs survey and file paperwork with the IRS every three years to show they are still needed in the community. Since 2010, St. Jude has complied with all requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable

According to forbes.com United States corporations spent over seventy billion dollars on training in 2014. That’s fifteen percent increase from the year prior. With this growth of training, training and organizational development professionals are in high demand. Forbes notes economic growth for this increase. With health care reform in the United States, healthcare organizations are seeing growth. Many health care organizations are focused on lowering their cost to cover the expected decrease in reimbursements. As the number of United States citizens with health coverage increases, insurers and regulator bodies are tightening their expectations on quality and safety. Health care organizations are spending millions on training and improvement initiatives are focused on decreasing waste and errors. By focusing on the following outcomes: cost and safety metrics; health care professionals may not be addressing cultural components and are allowing their initiatives to fail.