US and Japan Health Care Systems - Research Paper Example

US and Japan Health care system The American health care method has many debates, and there are two extremes. One claims that it is best in the world because of its facilities and modern technology. The other extreme points out that it is inefficient and fragmented. This extreme also says that the country suffers uneven quality, low insurance, and poor administration. Like any other part of the world, there are both private and public insurers in the nation (Grossmann, 2011, p69). What sets the country’s health care system apart from the rest is that there are more private insurers than public insurers. The main public health insurance companies include; Medicare, which is for those who are aged 65 and older, disabled people qualify for the program, and Medicaid that is meant for the low-income earners, as well as the disabled. The private medical insurance companies in the United States include; Insurance sponsored by the employer. This is what the majority of the insured people in the private insurance companies get their insurance. Private not group provides insurance cover to people who are retired or involved in self-employment. The financiers for the American health care system are both the government and the private sector as such the system can be considered a “multi-payer” system (Razani, 2012, p.213). The Japanese health care, on the other hand, is what is called a “universal health care plan.” This is because it offers every Japan ese citizen a free decision to pick a health care provider and this may include; employment-based for financing, multi-player, free for service in private hospitals. It is because of this that every Japanese citizen is covered by a health care plan regardless of the risk of them succumbing to their illness. The premiums that are offered in Japan are based on the ability to pay and income. Though there are strict rules that govern the issues of health care operation and financing, the delivery of health services and goods is left mainly to the doctors and other medical professionals. Although the doctors make the main decisions about the distribution of health services, there is no public complaint of rationing. On a shallow comparison of the two countries one notices that Japan manages to be the country with the highest mortality rate (Razani, 2012, p.78). While spending only 10.3 percent of its gross domestic product when USA spends almost doubles this (17.1) and still cannot attain equivalent results. From this, one can deduce that Japan’s health care system is more efficient because of the longer life span, low mortality and being able to spend half what USA spends. In Japan the entire population is insured. Therefore, there are no chances that one can be uninsured or underinsured, whereas for America it is possible to be both uninsured and underinsured (Muto, 2011, p29). For the uninsured they may have to spend their money to attend to their health care needs but for the underinsured, they are people who are insured but still spend a considerably big portion of their earning on medical attention. The financing structure of the US health care system consists of the following components, these are individuals and businesses, government, private insurers and health providers. Both the individuals and businesses pay tax to the government. Businesses pay all or most of the premiums and the employees pay the remainder as they are collected by private insurance companies. At times, people pay directly from their pockets. The government finances the health care system in the USA by sponsoring Medicare, the VA and Medicaid. The government pays private insurance to premiums of public company employees’. There are tax subsidies for employer-based cover of insurance. Private insurers take premiums from individual, the government and reimburse providers. Health practitioners offer their services to take care of the individuals, and are in return reimbursed by both the government and private insurers. The percentage of GDP spent on health care in the USA is 17.1%. In Japan, on the other hand, health services are majorly paid by the government, which finances them from the social health insurance money. Health expenditure in 2009 comprised of 37.5% government health expenditure, 13.9% out of pocket financial payment and 48.6% social health insurance. Social insurance schemes are about 3500 offering both community and occupational schemes. In social insurance, one is enrolled depending on occupation and age. The premium to be paid in social insurance is based on income and rates from the insurer. This usually ranges from 3.12% to 9.62%. People who use services are required to pay 30% of the government price of curative services and 10% for prolonged treatment. Payment may vary depending on age and circumstance. The insurance companies pay the remaining amount of money via claims examination, institution and finally to the health facility. The insurance companies cater for very high medical costs. Those who are on maternity leave, employees who cannot go to work and funeral expenses have assured financial aid. Some medical conditions also warrant free treatment. Those who accept social security are not forced to join insurance schemes (Nozaki & Kashiwase, 2014, p119). Health care setting in the USA is riddled with a number of challenges. The US medical structure for long-term and chronic illness has a poor model of care. This is because it is not clear what a disease is, the duties of health workers and the appropriate response to those who are sick. The structure has poor coordination and is fragmented. This reduces the efficiency and medical care offered to the patient. It is especially so for patients who suffer from more than one chronic illness. Other weakness of the USA, health care system, include; not practicing evidence-based medicine and not using optimized information technology. On the other hand, in Japan the structure of health care plans for chronic illnesses is well defined. In addition, evidence-based medicine is practiced to the later. The duties and responsibilities of health specialists are well defined and coordinated. Both Japan and USA have a good health care surveillance where a number of hospitals send their data for analysis and they then get feedback information. This has been happening since the 1990s. Health care is always readily available and only 5.9% of the people fail to obtain the needed health care and this is because they cannot afford it (Esmail &Vancouver, 2013, p84). This is equally so in Japan only that virtually 100% of the people receive health care and the insurance policy covers everyone. Furthermore, because of the availability of advanced technology and sophisticated medical equipment the access of medical attention is good in the country (Asian Perspectives and Evidence on Health Promotion and Education, 2011, p46). The United States uses up to date technology in its health care system, and this has helped the system to provide better treatment and diagnosis. Due to the IT technology, doctors are able to communicate with patients, which reduces the cost of accessing medical care, linking doctors with other doctors and even going to the extent of networking through things like Doximity. This helps patients to stay healthier. Better pharmaceutical technologies are used to synthesis drugs, which are more effective and sometimes cheaper. The same is true for Japan. The role of public health care system in USA are variant and this include dealing with perceived epidemics, support the poor and the vulnerable in accessing health care, introducing and running big medical programs such as the Obama care (Merino, 2011, p52). This is still the same in Japan especially since the 1980s when the Japan government started to take a keen interest in the accessibility of health care services. One can conclude that Japan’s health care system is efficient with minimal weakness and that is why it can attain more and still spend less. As for the US health care system, the health workers should work together to improve its efficiency and the American government should think of introducing a health care system similar to that of Japan. References Asian Perspectives and Evidence on Health Promotion and Education. (2011). Springer. Esmail, N., & Vancouver, B. (2013). Health care lessons from Japan . Vancouver, B.C.: Fraser Institute. Grossmann, C. (2011). Digital infrastructure for the learning health system: The foundation for continuous improvement in health and health care : Workshop series summary. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. Merino, N. (2011). Health care. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press. Muto, T. (2011). Asian perspectives and evidence on health promotion and education. Tokyo: Springer. Nozaki, M., & Kashiwase, K. (2014). Health Spending in Japan . Washington: International Monetary Fund. Razani, M. (2012). Information, communication, and space technology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Read More