The Cost Of Medicine: Article Analysis

Our Healthcare system is clearly business based according to the article “Cost Conundrum” and on the movie “Escape Fire”. In the movie it had an impacting story of an older lady who had heart problems where she went to a doctor and they were going to charge her thousands of dollars were later she went to a different doctor and they charged her a couple hundred dollars for t he same procedure. I couldn’t believe that in a different office she would get the same procedure done for a lot cheaper than in the other doctor’s office. Also, it surprised me how the medical staff are giving all these medications to our soldiers were they are clearly

It is an indisputable fact that under the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, there is a larger demand for organs than there is available supply. As a result, people in need of kidney or liver transplants die every year while waiting. Under the current system, the only way to receive an organ transplant is either by having a family member selflessly volunteer to donate theirs, or by being put on a waiting list to receive an organ from the recently deceased. To combat this lack of supply, some in need of transplants desperately turn to the black market, paying enormous sums of money for organs that were more than likely taken illegally. Others die waiting for a transplant that was never realistically going to happen in time. In essence, the gap between supply and demand for organs is causing both a loss in quantity and quality of lives. However, changing policy to allow payments to organ donors would drastically reduce this gap, therefore decreasing wait time for organs and saving lives. The crucial step that must be taken to save these lives is to repeal the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 which prohibits the sale of organs.

In the United State healthcare system, there is a disparity between treating patients and treating our pockets. In the article, the big pill, there is a patient Sean Recchi who goes to MD Anderson, a hospital in Texas, due to a flare-up of his Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Unfortunately, to Recchi’s family surprise, he was being charged ridiculously high prices for his medical care. To make matters worse, the hospital would not accept their insurance and told Recchi’s wife, Stephanie, that they would have to pay $48,000 in advance for Sean to be seen for 6 days in the hospital before a treatment plan could be developed. Luckily, Stephanie had the money and wrote a check but imagine if she didn’t. Had she not had the money, what other option would she have? What other option would Sean have? Death?

When you think about health care cost and what was done in the past to help people who could not afford it to be able to get coverage now. Many people will not be able to afford to get the mandatory coverage and if they do, they will not be able to afford to see the physician or take the medication that they needed. Some of the plans worked and others helped for short periods. With other countries, finding ways to make it work for them and stakeholders more worried in the U.S.A. over their assets. With the rise of the older generation living longer but having more health issues is a reason to look into getting better coverage that is affordable for all for health care.

The cost of health explains almost half of the budgets of the state from financing the Medicaid program to providing health care for the employees of the state and other less qualified population like the prisoners (Vanderbeaux, 2014). In America, thousands upon thousands of decisions concerning health care are made by State legislatures every year (Vanderbeaux, 2014). Some of those decisions involve how best to provide appropriate care more efficiently, and deciding on what age group of patients needs to be immunized (Vanderbeaux, 2014).

Recommendation for the author is to provide further proof that the techniques practiced to reduce spending remain the best methods and that it did not have any bearing on consumers who heavily relies on the program. The reason is that most Medicare users are either people over the age of 65 or people with disabilities. Reduce Medicare spending might be helpful, but if it is not benefiting the consumers, it serves, the interest becomes unwarranted. After all, Medicare covers only eighty percent of consumer’s medical expenses, leaving users with twenty percent cost of medical bills. Nevertheless, I would suggest the author to report on consumers and healthcare practitioners’ feedback regarding the finance cuts by CMS.

The aging population of the United States along with a healthcare financial system not adequate to cover the cost will be a major factor in the future of healthcare. There is a disparity in health care related socioeconomic status, age of emerging population and quality of care that require new modes of care to address patient affordability, knowledge, physician cultural competency, bias and the scope of health insurance coverage (Fiscella, 2002). The population of aging Americans will increase to 3.4 million by 2020 due to the influx of over the age of 65 retiring resulting in a 21.6% in older Americans requiring health services (Longevity, 2011). In addition, this emerging population will require additional services to an increase in life

In the business of drug production over the years, there have been astronomical gains in the technology of pharmaceutical drugs. More and more drugs are being made for diseases and viruses each day, and there are many more drugs still undergoing research and testing. These "miracle" drugs are expensive, however, and many Americans cannot afford these prices.

There is no doubt that healthcare cost are rising out of control. No one likes the

Traditionally the American health care system relied heavily a repayment model referred to as fee-for-service which is described as a form of repayment that generates a greater emphasis on the volume of patients seen rather than healthy outcomes produced under a physician’s care. The fee-for-service repayment method poses multiple issues such as: duplicating services which in turn renders some of the services unnecessary, utilization of expensive technology because of the revenue generation rather than as a valuable diagnostic tool and crowding caseloads to an unmanageable level in order to achieve highest level of reimbursement. The aforementioned events not only have the possibility of being unethical but also drive up the cost of health care in the United States. Currently, health care costs have not only increased, but the Office of the Actuary projected that U.S. healthcare spending will make up nearly 20 percent of the economy in 2019. One would argue that if as a country we are spending so much on health care that we should be a “healthier” nation, but this is not the case. Even though America continues to be the largest spender on health care, collectively we experience a lower life expectancy rate compared to other industrialized countries (hfma.com, 2011, p. 2). To assist with climbing health care rates healthcare purchasers have called for repayment reform. One such reform that has been on the forefront is Value-Based Health Care (VBH), also known as outcome

The cost of the chronic illness, diabetes, is financially draining for patients and time consuming for providers. Adding to the cost burden, patients with the dual diagnosis of mental illness and diabetes, incur even more medical cost associated with their chronic nature and the care of the comorbidities associated with both illnesses. In addition, the time required of physicians in the care management of the dual diagnosed translates into decreased number of patients the physician treats during their daily schedule. Consequently, resulting in decreased revenue due to fewer patients being treated during a daily office schedule.

This is a great thread and I appreciate you writing it. Healthcare is a right and equal treatment should be available but at what cost? I have read some interesting articles on rationing health care spending or perhaps controlling cost is easier to accept. Either way, medical cost continue to increase and spending needs to be controlled which means denying something to someone but to whom and what? Is this what we want the government to decide or is this something as nurses we can make an impact and influence healthcare spending?

1) In a traditional economic market, basic rules of supply and demand create a variance in price and, depending on the situation and how the market is perceptually framed, a variance in the products or services being offered in the market (Prasch, 2008). These variances create and/or are created by relationships between consumers and producers, and an implicit agreement between these two basic parties regarding the value of a good or service is reached simply by determining what price producers can produce at and what price consumers are willing to pay; the connection between producer and consumer is direct (Prasch, 2008). Even in situations where this is complicated by the existence of separate manufacturers, wholesalers/distributors, and retailers, the basic relationship remains the same for each relationship and in the overall market scheme (Prasch, 2008).

Costs included insured direct medical costs of inpatient, outpatient, laboratory and pharmacy in health insurance claims data. To assess the costs, patients diagnosed with lung cancer (C34) using the Korean Standard Classification of Diseases version 6 (KCD-6) codes were selected. To select patients with NSCLC IIIb and IV, an operational definition of all the cases excluding the patients who had have surgery of patients having received chemotherapy was used. The main assumption in the cost assessment was that costs only depended on the treatment regimen regardless of first-line or second-line, or regardless of EGFR mutation status.

Across the world, health systems differ affectedly in structure, organization, human resource capacity, financing, and service delivery, . Though the demographic, and disease profile of high income, middle income, and low income countries are converging, difference remain. However, every health system still has some common inherent, underlying components and functions. As nations attempt to reform their systems to improve health come, reduce financial risk, and improve access to care. The World Health Organization (who) 2000 World Health, Report Health systems: Improving performance, defines a health system as “all activities that primary purpose is to promote, restore, or maintain health.”