Comparison between UK and US Health Care System
Name
Class
Professor
Institution
City and state
Date
Comparison between UK and US Healthcare System
A healthcare system comprises of people, organizations, as well as resources that offer medical services to ensure an individual’s health is well. The UK healthcare system was previously available to the well-off persons in the country unless one was able to afford free treatment. Later on, the National Insurance Act was introduced where a small amount of fee was deducted from an individual’s salary after which they would be entitled to access free healthcare (Papanicolas & Smith, 2013 P.46). However, this was not still convenient, as majority of those who were not employed could not yet obtain these services. Presently, there is a public health care system in the UK where the services are offered free to everyone since the whole process is financed by the central organization. On the other hand, the US health care organization has a majority of their health care financed by the private institution rather than the government. In essence, the population in the US has rapidly grown, and this has overburdened the government in providing health care services to all of them. As a result, the quality of the services in their community hospitals is very low hence; some people have resolved to have a personal cover (Wang et al., 2011 P.821). This essay, therefore, seeks to compare and contrast the healthcare system in these two nations.
First, the UK is ranked among some of the top countries that provide quality services to their citizens. Primarily, it has one of the best universal healthcare system as it takes care of every person’s health whether poor or rich (National Center for Health Statistics US, 2012 P.51). On the other hand, the US provides one of the poorest quality health facilities to its natives ranging from the funding to the quality of service. Notably, this country underperforms in delivering high-class abilities such as efficiency, equity, and patient safety. Consequently, it does not have a universal health care insurance like the UK. Secondly, the US spends more GDP in its health care systems yearly compared to the UK; that is, the United Kingdom spends almost 10 percent of its GDP on health care yet serves a greater percentage of its residents. In contrast, the US spends 20 percent of its GDP on healthcare provisions and yet serves only a quarter of the population (Schoental, 2013 P.2212). Thirdly, the United Kingdom has made health care services be free and accessible to every permanent citizen if its country. For instance, both children and adults despite their class or race are treated equally in the healthcare sectors depending on their needs. On the other hand, the United States system has set its own incomes and period required for a resident to be accredited the public medical services as per his need. An example is where medical institutions such as Medicare and Medicaid can only offer the health care amenities if one earns a particular range of salary or has attained a given age limit.
In terms of organization, the United States private institutions are more structured to provide excellent health care services to its nationalities. In essence, it has different departments with skilled professionals who can handle acute diseases such as cancer, diabetes among others. For this reason, foreign individuals have always preferred seeking medical attention from the United States due to the available health care amenities. On the contrary, the United Kingdom’s organization in terms of providing special treatment to its patient is quite pathetic. Most of their patients lose their lives at a higher rate compared to the United States. For instance, the number of patients who died from prostate cancer in a given year in the UK was five times higher compared to the United States. Consequently, the elderly in the US have a more outstanding health compared to those in the UK due to the availability and arrangement of the organizations function (Ali et al., 2012 P.34).
Pertaining to the similarities, both the UK and US health care system is under the World Health Organization who manage their activities (Blas & Sivasankara, 2010 P.132). Ultimately, the WHO has ensured that the healthcare systems in the two countries are running efficiently and that the public is entitled to equal health provisions. As a result, each of the nations is working towards ensuring that their citizens from poor backgrounds are accredited these services competently. Next, both of these nations’ healthcare systems are partly funded by the world health organization. More so, these financial aids granted have been able to assist during a crisis when they cannot certain essential drugs or equipment used in the hospitals. Consequently, the two states are presently making prepayments on the health care system as much as possible in the form of insurance, social security, and taxes (Boyle, 2011 P.72). Accordingly, this has also aided them in dealing with healthcare crises such as lack of funding or inadequate medical tools. Lastly, the well-off citizens of these countries are the ones still benefiting from the services compared to the unfortunate ones. For this reason, they are all trying to reduce this disparity by prioritizing the actions that can improve the health of the humble ones in the society. Fair and quality health care services are, therefore, a primary concern in these two nations.
In conclusion, it is evident the two countries have specific similarities and differences. The US healthcare system is generally poor compared to the UK health system regarding the funding and quality. Nonetheless, the public especially the needy ones seem to be suffering more compared to the rest when it comes to acquiring these services. On the other hand, the United Kingdom’s health services appear better than the other one because it provides a universal health care system to all its citizens despite their class, age, or income. Moreover, this has reduced the resident’s burden as they can access the benefits even without a single penny. Despite all these, it is also clear that two nation’s healthcare systems are under the WHO and, as a result, they should be functioning likewise in a number of ways. Accordingly, the World Health Organization key role is to ensure that all these two countries deliver universal health care assistance to all its residents without prejudice.
References
Ali, M. K., Bullard, K. M., Imperatore, G., Barker, L., & Gregg, E. W. (2012). Characteristics associated with poor glycemic control among adults with self-reported diagnosed diabetes—National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, United States, 2007–2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 61(2), 32-37.
Blas, E., & Sivasankara Kurup, A. (2010). Equity, social determinants and public health programmes. Geneva, World Health Organization.
Boyle, S. (2011). United Kingdom (England). Health system review. Health Systems in Transition, 13.
National Center for Health Statistics (US. (2012). Health, United States, 2011: With special feature on socioeconomic status and health.
Papanicolas, I., & Smith, P. (2013). Health system performance comparison an agenda for policy, information and research.
Schoen, C., Osborn, R., Squires, D., & Doty, M. M. (2013). Access, affordability, and insurance complexity are often worse in the United States compared to ten other countries. Health Affairs, 32(12), 2205-2215.
Wang, Y. C., McPherson, K., Marsh, T., Gortmaker, S. L., & Brown, M. (2011). Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK. The Lancet, 378(9793), 815-825.
