Healthcaresystem models aim at aiding in the proper organization and managementof available resources and facilities with the goal of deliveringservices that meet the people`s needs. Concerning that, variousmodels are in place around the globe to ensure that healthcare needsare meet efficiently and in an appropriate manner. In this context,we would describe four basic models that are available and theconcepts around them additionally their differences in implementationand strategies.
Thismodel obtains the name from the reformer who designed it namedWilliam Beveridge. It`s commonly implemented in Britain, Cuba amongother states and involves a healthcare system where the government isin control. Healthcare services are provided and financed by thegovernment through taxes similar to other departments like the policedepartment. The government owns the clinics and medical practitionerswhom it employs to provide services. Despite there being some privatepracticing doctors, they receive their fees from the government,never are you faced with a situation as a patient where you encountera doctor`s bill (Delnoij,2013).
Thesystem tends to have quite a minimal per capita since the governmentis the sole controller of the healthcare services and manage toregulate what can be done and not done by the doctors.
Themodel, to begin with, was named after the chancellor Otto VonBismarck who came up with the idea of the welfare state as part of away to unify Germany. The system has similarity to that applied andused in America whereby an insurance system is in use. The insurersreferred to as sickness funds financed by employers and employeesthrough deduction of money in their payrolls. It’s not aimed atmaking profits which is the case in the USA and it ensures thateveryone gets covered by the plan. Medical practitioners andhospitals more often than not tend to undertake their activitiesprivately. Controls which are tightly enhanced ensure that thegovernment in control of the cost levied similar to the case providedfor in Bismarck model.
Othercountries where the system is in place include Japan, France,Belgium, and Netherlands among others.
Outof Pocket Model
Inthis model, it applies the fundamental principle that the rich gethealth care services while the poor can die. Least countries inprecise the developed one’s have the capability of providingadvanced healthcare services while the others seem to be in a stateof confusion and disorientation. Most of the times, citizens wouldhave to scratch themselves in unison to obtain funds to pay a doctoror use other means such as providing food as an alternative topayment to purchase health services. Additionally, citizens can gofor long periods without ever seeing a doctor but only relying ontraditional healers who may not be competent enough to providequality healthcare services (Lagomarsino,Garabrant & Otoo, 2012).
Countries,where this system is common include India, South America, and Africacontinent due to poverty among others.
NationalHealth Insurance Model
It`sa combination of factors incorporated in both Bismarck and Beveridge.The system operates in a way that private health providers are usedto provide the healthcare services, but in turn, they receive paymentfrom the government-run insurance program which all citizens have ahand in its funding. The system is beneficial in that it`s not drivenby a profit making mentality that leads to some instances of denialof services and no marketing strategies are in place. The onlyfinancier which is the government tends to have the ability toinstigate a negotiation for the reduction of prices offered (Folland,Goodman & Stano, 2007).
Furthermore,the system is also of benefit in that its controls costs by limitingthe services provided by making payment later on and also delayingpatient`s treatment. Countries that seem to have adopted this modelinclude Canada and other rising industrialized states such as SouthKorea and Taiwan which are catching up.
Futureof healthcare in the USA
Tryingto obtain insights into the future of healthcare in America, it’sexpected that it would be better and improve more as a result of theprogress undertaken. Policies are being developed that give citizensmore power to decide on their health matters. It is vital in theprovision of freedom to choose on how you can control your healthaffairs. On top of that, technology is being incorporated into healthprograms more so as to improve efficiency in the delivery of servicesand also enhance quality at the same time. All this is in a view toimproving the sector and make it more accessible and cover numerousindividuals overall. It creates positive prospects and the need ofbeing optimistic about the future.
Conclusively,depending on the ability of a nation putting into consideration themost efficient way to utilize resources to build a healthy society,their health systems can fit into any of the above four models.Moreover, none of them is preferred over the other, and it will be onconsideration put in their suitability to meet their needs andfacilitate their operations smoothly.
Lagomarsino,G., Garabrant, A., Adyas, A., Muga, R., & Otoo, N. (2012). Movingtowards universal health coverage: health insurance reforms in ninedeveloping countries in Africa and Asia. TheLancet, 380(9845),933-943.
Delnoij,D. (2013). Bismarck or Beveridge: primary care matters. TheEuropean Journal Of Public Health,23(3),349-349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckt021
Folland,S., Goodman, A. C., & Stano, M. (2007). Theeconomics of health and health care (Vol.6). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.