A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
From charlatan's workspace   

I hope they're grading on a serious curve.... Results from the National Scorecard on U.S. Health System Performance, 2008

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=692682

It's easier to read the charts and whatnot in the article.

This seems to sum it up along with the 101,000 unnecessary deaths:

Efficiency: Average Score 53

* Inappropriate, wasteful, or fragmented care: In 2007, as in 2005, U.S. patients were much more likely—three to four times the benchmark rate—than patients in other countries to report having had duplicate tests or that medical records or test results were not available at the time of their appointment.
* Avoidable hospitalizations: Average rates of hospital readmissions within 30 days remained high, at 18 percent in both 2003 and 2005. Rates in the highest regions were 50 percent higher than in the lowest regions. Rates of hospitalizations for preventable conditions decreased somewhat from 2002–2003 to 2004–2005, but continued to vary two- to fourfold across hospital regions and states.
* Variation in quality and costs: Among Medicare patients treated for heart attacks, hip fractures, or colon cancer, a high proportion of regions with the lowest mortality rates also had lower total costs, indicating that it is possible to save lives and lower costs through more effective, efficient systems. The total costs of caring for patients with chronic disease varied twofold across regions.
* Administrative costs: U.S. health insurance administrative costs as a share of total health spending are 30 percent to 70 percent higher than in countries with mixed private/public insurance systems and three times higher than in countries with the lowest rates.
* Information systems: U.S. primary care physicians' use of electronic medical records (EMRs) increased from 17 percent to 28 percent from 2001 to 2006. Still, the U.S. lags far behind leading countries, where EMRs are now used by nearly all physicians (98%) to improve care.

created by charlatan on Jul 18, 2008 at 09:25:13 pm     Comments: 9

print      source      versions

Comments ... #

And the Liberals want the goverment to take over health care, That number would drop like a rock. Goverment cant even buy hammers cheaply and you want them in charge of health care?

If you look at national health care in countries that already have it, you would give national health care a second thought. People dying before ever getting to see a doctor, misdiagnosed by overworked doctors. Lack of medical workers because of low wages.

Now imagine a American National Health Care System, costs tripled, denial of services, long lines, long travel, 5 million hoops to jump through, 12 million forms to fill out, twice because they dont share that information. Sorry we dont care if your doctor did insist on the brand medication, here is a generic thats close enough. Oops we gave you the wrong stuff, oops we dont have any more until next month, oops that item is under recall. Oops we got it from the lowest bidder.

posted by Linecrosser on Jul 18, 2008 at 09:57:03 pm     #



If you look at national health care in countries that already have it, you would give national health care a second thought

Does that include all the countries that have some form of universal healthcare that are ranked ahead of the US?

posted by pink_slip on Jul 18, 2008 at 11:37:25 pm     #



Hmm guess those siamese children and children with other major health issues should go to those countries for healthcare. Guess we aren't making any breakthroughs in medical treatments or surgery. Yeah I guess when you look at it Americas health system is completely broken and we should all go to mexico or canada for everything for our health.

posted by Linecrosser on Jul 19, 2008 at 11:47:41 am     #



Linecrosser, nothing you've said is a problem for millions who can't see a doctor since they don't have the money for either insurance or an office visit. The basic problem is that BASIC CARE is too expensive in the nation and must drop. After all, waiting a week or two to see a doctor for a minor health issue is much better than never seeing the doctor and then showing up at the emergency room when the problem became catastrophic.

You people who demonize socialized medicine never seem to get that. Delayed care is better than NO CARE + EMERGENCY CARE.

As it stands, however, the Democrats have been brainwashed into believing that the Massachusetts Model is how socialized medicine (or "universal coverage") is going to work in the nation. It's just more submission to the insurance companies and their insatiable profit motive. By removing the insurance companies, you will see all this upward price pressure VANISH. Then we can see what government involvement will have on prices.

posted by GuestZero on Jul 19, 2008 at 02:07:34 pm     #



Face it. The only thing dumber than a Moonbat is a hammer. Or, maybe, a lake Erie carp.

Courtesy of the inimitable Guest Zero: It's just more submission to the insurance companies and their insatiable profit motive. By removing the insurance companies, you will see all this upward price pressure VANISH.

I used to be so puzzled, wondering why the Moonbats and the Stupid Party didn't understand this. Then, during a bourbon infused epiphany, I was suddenly struck with the knowledge that, in fact, both the Moonbats and the Stupid Party know this as fact. Both sides have been purchased by the insurance companies, who then increase rates to cover certain political activist salaries and miscellaneous expenses.

The only government funded health care system that would work successfully is a direct billing system. The provider bills the government directly. The government pays the invoice as well as providing malpractice insurance. Why not? The US government provides flood insurance.

For any of you who have the slightest doubt that this method will be significantly cheaper than the system we have now, stop and think. How do insurance companies afford the enormous office buildings they own? By paying claims? Who do you think provides health care for all those people who really can't afford health insurance?

Answer to the begged question: We, the taxpayers, pay. We, the employed middle class, pay.

I'm sick and tired of insurance companies getting rich off my dollars. Let's get rid of the fat middle man and make our own deal.

posted by madjack on Jul 19, 2008 at 11:12:26 pm     #



Agghhh, yes, flood insurance. That's worked out well (cough, cough, choke). After all, it allows people (often, the very rich) to build and live right on the water. Then, we, the taxpayers, bail them out when the storms come.

Over....and over.....and over....and over again.

Sorry to go off-topic.

posted by Postal on Jul 19, 2008 at 11:31:47 pm     #



These rankings are pretty futile. The "quality" is rated by the WHO, and no one (note sarcasm) says they are biased. If you want top of the line, cutting edge medical care there is no better place than the United States. There is financial incentive in the US to innovate, improve, and Comparing life expectancy (which the US is doing pretty well in) is not that useful because genetics play such a huge role in life expectancy as evidenced by Asians. For example, people of African descent probably have a shorter biologic life expectancy due to heart disease. That automatically puts the US at a disadvantage when compared to Europe because of our large AA population. Don't forget the lifestyle choices Americans make as well. There is no fatter country in the world, and as such we can't expect to have the same average life span as a country that sees a fraction of the obesity and therefore heart disease and diabetes. You could make 100% of all healthcare paid for and you aren't going to change those underlying factors affecting our health.

Nationalizing healthcare will not stop the cost overruns of healthcare. All the other 1st world countries are dealing with the exact same problem. The first thing we have to learn is when to say "no" to futile ICU admissions, ventilator support for weeks on end, and heroic surgeries and treatments used to extend life by days. Just go to any of the big hospital ICUs in Toledo and see for yourself the waste of resources on people that will never wake up and most likely never make it out of the hospital alive. Before we fix that problem our country is going to be overrun with cost increases in healthcare.

posted by HeyHey on Jul 20, 2008 at 01:05:44 am     #



HeyHey, I agree in principle with what you're saying. I consider socialized medicine to have a system of rationing built in. I don't understand how anyone thinks otherwise. Uncontrolled service growth is a problem in any system, and it should be stopped.

Extraordinary procedures for extending life should be covered by private insurance, once the rationed level of care within the nationalized system is reached. And if you can't afford that expense, then you're going to have to die. Sorry for the all-too-Liberal set, but we're mortal and our finances are finite, and the sheer cost of many of these procedures means that that mortality and economics overrule your "right" to live.

We still have the best technical medical care on earth, and that makes your chances better for survival all around. But as your care needs rise towards the more esoteric of services, your chances of affording them drop.

posted by GuestZero on Jul 20, 2008 at 09:23:22 am     #



Who do you think provides health care for all those people who really can't afford health insurance?...Answer to the begged question: We, the taxpayers, pay. We, the employed middle class, pay....I'm sick and tired of insurance companies getting rich off my dollars. Let's get rid of the fat middle man and make our own deal.

Madjack is right. I'll take it a step further and say most of the research that leads to our medical advances is funded by the taxpayers as well. How much is United Healthcare or BCBS spending on R&D? I'm with you--direct bill to gov't. Then, private healthcare providers would compete against each other based on the level of service they provide. What a novel idea

posted by pink_slip on Jul 20, 2008 at 12:54:18 pm     #