India 's Government Expenditure On Health

Although total spending provides insight into overall health care spending, additional indicators are used to measure changes to health care financing. These include the amount spent calculated as a percentage of GDP and the amount spent per capita. As a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), CIHI reports that health care expenditure decreased from 11.6% of GDP in 2011 to 10.9% of GDP in 2015 (image 2: CIHI spending as percentage of GDP). This decline is corroborated by the World Health Organization (WHO) analysis

The healthcare system in each country is intended to meet the best possible medical services needs of its citizens. One country’s healthcare system can vary from another. This is according to their administration strategy, training, education, technology, and spending plan. Social, economic, political, and physical parts of the nation also play huge role in defining a country’s healthcare system. There are many similarities in the delivery of medical services between United States and Nepal. For the middle class people, affording a good healthcare system is still an unresolved issue of these two countries. The issue of financing the system of healthcare has been the biggest challenge to the government of Nepal, and it is similar to the Medicare and Medicaid programs in the United States. Although Nepal and the United States have similarities in healthcare system, they also equally share significant differences in providers, spending and the medical professionals. Some people consider that the healthcare system in the U.S. is superior.

The Indian health care market has a current size of US$ 65 billion. Hospital supplies and health care equipment segment ranges between US$ 4.5-5 million. Hospitals, pharmaceuticals, nursing homes and diagnostics centres, that form a part of healthcare delivery, constitute 65 per cent of the total market.

People are living longer, population is increasing by the day. Public spending is insufficient hence the infusion of private funds can assist in providing the 1st class health service that the people required.

However, there is numerous comparison results already have been made so far suggests that United States health expenditure may not be the most efficient spending in the world. In contrast, statistics continuously disclose that we are on the lower group among the developed countries in terms of efficiency. According to the World Health Organization, United States have

It also ranks 37th out of the world’s 191 countries in overall health care efficiency according to the World Health Organization. Although this ranking may appear decent at first glance, it becomes apparent that the current system is broken given the context that the “U.S. [spends] more per person on health care than 12 other high-income nations” (The Commonwealth Fund). These twelve countries include Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

The pie-chart above reviews the distribution of National Health Expenditures revealing that a majority of healthcare dollars were spent on hospital care and physician/clinical services. On the other hand, public health activity along with research and structures and equipment constituted only 14.8% of the healthcare expenditure. This disparity in distribution of funds points to a deep-seated neglect in supporting preventive services.

A. Health is the component of the consumption that we spent a much greater percentage in 2011 in comparison to 1967. During the 21st century, health care systems throughout the world are concentrating strategy efforts on enhancing the aspect of healthcare provided to the society. The health care quality that have improved during the years accommodated with the adjustment of output variables such as morbidity rate, mortality rate (also during infancy), and life expectancy of a certain population. Inputs such as healthcare consumption and services, and the amount of healthcare professions and facilities also developed throughout those years. For example, ambulatory healthcare facilities are so prevalent today because it creates competition in the market with hospitals care facilities. It is more convenient, as it is likely easier to be found and make appointments rather than going into a large health care facility to get the care people need. It is also efficient with the cost of getting the treatments and care patients seek with an offer of a lower co-payment in comparison to hospitals. The development in these given inputs and outputs regulates the percentage of GDP.

Figure 3: Total Health Expenditure as % of GDP, Australia and selected OECD countries, 1976-1999.

The major problem, they have within the healthcare industry is the lack of government funding and the total expenditure on health per capita is $109, compared to the $7290 per capita in the United States. Healthcare consumes 4.9% of India’s GDP versus the 16% in the United States. The outcomes equal long lines, fewer facilities and inefficient staff. The supply of healthcare in India is on par with that in sub-Saharan African countries. According to the World Bank, 75% of all health expenditures is in the private sector, where 90% of healthcare costs are paid out-of-pocket.

This can explain the reason as to why nations all around the globe give the sector sufficient attention. Its essence to the society at large leads to the interest that many have in it. It has been ascertained that a healthy society comprising of healthy persons is key to having a working and effective nation (Laura, 2007). For this to be fulfilled, a good healthcare plays a rather fundamental role. This therefore means that the biggest priority for any government in power should be the promotion and sustenance of a healthy nation, a matter that can be dealt with by ensuring that the healthcare facilities and medical centers are readily available to the citizens. Even more important than the availability of service however, is the provision of suitable health care coverage that makes health care a service primarily providing by the government.

It is a well established fact that all countries must have efficiently organized and managed health financing systems in order to ensure human welfare. Or it can be simply said that without the necessary funds, no health workers will be employed, no medicines would be available nor will any health promotion or prevention activities take place (WHO). However it should also be noted that financing is not merely the generation of funds. It is one of the critical determinants that influence health outcomes in a country. It is mandatory to have a good financing mechanism in place to ensure equity and accessibility as well as to protect the majority of the population from catastrophic health expenditures. Even in a high income country like the United States, cost escalations have put even the basic healthcare inaccessible to several segments of the population, where carefully planned financing arrangements have not been implemented (HLEG Report on UHC 2011).

According to the organization for economic cooperation and development (OECD), the United States spend 17.7% of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health in 2011 more than any other country in the world. The average expenditure for 34 developed countries is 9.3% of GDP, which is mean that the United States, is the leading country in health expenditure. The private expenditure represents almost 60% of the total health expenditure, which is higher than any country in the world. The expenditure itself is not the only issue now but total expenditure growth from one year to another since 1970s is much more than other countries.

Worldwide, approximately 1.3 billion people do not have access to affordable and efficient healthcare and out of those who have access, almost 170 million are forced to spend around 40 % of their income on medical treatment (Asante et al,2016).In low and middle income countries (LMICs), the major constraint to the access of healthcare is financial burden, where out-of-pocket payments (OPP) contribute to approximately 50 % of total health expenditure (WHO, 2010). As a result, in these countries there is high probability of many households being pushed into poverty due to high medical expenses (McIntyre,2006).The matter of concern in LMICS is that poor and disadvantaged groups of population do not have access to adequate quality of healthcare.For instance, according to WHO (2010) up to 20 % of women in rich population are more likely to have a birth attended by skilled health worker than a poor woman. Therefore, taking an action to address health inequities faced in these countries would save up to 700,000 women.

The state of Chhattisgarh today faces several challenges in improving the health status of its people. The on-going problems of maternal and child mortality, communicable diseases, and HIV/AIDS pandemic still need greater interventions/support from the already overburdened health systems. In addition, the public health challenges include the escalating burden of chronic non communicable diseases, lack of infrastructure, human resource and healthcare services.