Abstract
The paper discusses the NHS, and describes how, in spite of inadequate budgets, both infant mortality and life expectancy rates are comparable to other modern Western countries. The paper explores how, at the same time that costs are soaring, the number of people needing services is rising, but those contributing to the social security funds are shrinking. The paper concludes that, while the NHS solved a medical emergency in 1948 when it was founded, it will have to continue to grow and evolve, and continue to find creative solutions to the problems it will face in the future, if it is to remain a viable health care solution for Great Britain.

From the Paper
"Great Britain also struggles with emergency care. In a hospital study conducted in 2003, NHS evaluators evaluated a hospital in the town of Hackney to see whether it met the government's target of a maximum of a four-hour wait for emergency care before either being admitted or released. The hospital performed quite well. However, the hospital knew the evaluation was coming. It pulled medical staff from other departments. The director of the hospital acknowledged that the hospital could not sustain that pace over time and that they had taken extraordinary lengths to keep the emergency room better staffed than it was typically."

Tags:restructured, control, costs, redistribution, long-term, planning, government, bureaucracy

Abstract
This paper begins by providing an in-depth history of Britain's NHS. It identifies problem areas that have emerged in relation to NHS, with an attempt made to address the manner in which such problems have historically influenced reform efforts. It then moves to the present day and examines a summary of the 2000 NHS Plan. It explains the economic and social implications of this plan. It then looks at some of the differences that may exist in health care systems. It reviews the major types of health insurance systems utilized currently within Japan, Sweden, and Canada, and then provides a brief comparison between these systems and the NHS in the UK. It finally looks at where the World Health Organization and health care funding systems fit into the NHS.

Outline
Historical Perspective
Summary of 2000 NHS Plan
Review of Healthcare Systems in OECD Countries
World Health Organization and Health Care Funding
Conclusion

From the Paper
"With the passage and associated provisions of the NHS Act of 1946, NHS was implemented in the UK in 1948. The NHS Act of 1946 served as the means by which a pattern of health service finance and provision was established in the UK following World War II (Baggot, 1998). According to Baggot, on the basis of the Act, the principle of collective responsibility by the state for the establishment of a comprehensive health service system was introduced, allowing for the planned use of services by the entire population at no cost. It was also intended that equality of access to services would be incorporated within NHS as a consequence of the availability of health services at no charge."

Tags:OECD, WHO, budget, economics

Abstract
This paper discusses the issue of the economic effectiveness of tort law in the common law legal system of England and Wales, as applied to medical and clinical negligence and malpractice cases. It looks at how in response to economic concerns and a continual rise in cases, an examination of the consideration of a proposed no-fault alternative to the current system is underway. It explores the basis of the current system, the impetus for change and the characteristics of no-fault reform as experienced by other countries and its pros and cons. The principal aim of tort reform is to limit the legal or financial exposure of the NHS (National Health System) to liability for damages and to streamline the process of compensation for plaintiffs.

Outline
The United Kingdom
Introduction
Statistics Regarding Claims
The National Health System
Obstacles to Due Process
The Case for Reform
The Regulatory Environment
The Rising Cost of Litigation
Lord Woolf's Reforms
More Cost Controls
The United States
Introduction
The St. Paul's Pullout
The Insurance Industry
Tort Reform In America
Fleeing Physicians
Statistics for Error, Injury and Death
The Call for Reform in 2003: A Familiar Refrain
The United States Situation, in Summary
New Zealand Case Studies
The Swedish Scheme
A Comparison: Which System is Better?
First: Underlying Differences
Talking Tort: American Peculiarities
Americans Consider No-Fault
Britain Considers No-Fault
Conclusion
Works Cited
Appendix A

From the Paper
"When St. Paul's, the largest writer of medical malpractice policies, ceased to offer the coverage in 2001-2002, it was the a consequence of the attention that had been focused on the administration of this type of coverage. A 1989 investigation of St. Paul's and one other insurer initiated by Michael Hatch, then Commerce Commissioner of Minnesota, revealed that over a six-year period premiums had increased 300 percent while claims had not. Hatch was quoted as saying the reason for the increase was: "Because they had the opportunity to do it. There was a limited market. People need coverage. The companies knew they had a corner on it, and they raised their rates accordingly." In response, a group of surgeons from Charleston jointly sued St. Paul for "grossly poor management". St. Paul's consequently dropped that type of coverage as part of its portfolio."

Tags:america, britain, medical, clinical, negligence, malpractice

Abstract
The paper discusses how the nature of the British healthcare system is to discourage rather than encourage healthcare usage, and this system has created a very cost-efficient model for the UK. The paper explains, however, that this frugality means that bypass surgery, dialysis, and medications in general are much more rarely prescribed in the UK than in the US. The paper relates that to address the problems of under-medication, there has been a proposal to allow drug companies in the UK with "innovative" medicines to bypass the current screening process for cost-effectiveness. The paper points out that this new policy could result in fewer NHS funds for more necessary procedures and drugs that could help more people, but also notes the economic and medical arguments for approving this proposal.

From the Paper
"Private insurance and expanded and expedited care is possible because unlike Canada, Britain allows citizens to hold supplementary insurance. As well as NHS care, patients can opt for care for which either they or their private insurer (or a combination of both) must pay. 11% have some form of employer-provided or private insurance, and "many jobs offer it as a perk" (Klein 2009). "To accommodate this, doctors can have both private and public practices, meaning they can treat patients under public rules complete with queues for non-pressing procedures while, at the same time, be performing the same procedures with quick turnaround for those with supplementary private insurance" (Klein 2005). Unsurprisingly, this has caused a great deal of discontent about such apparent inequality in a system which, at least in spirit, is supposed to be based upon the principle of equal care for all. The tension because of the disparity of quality that exists between public and private care has only been exacerbated in recent years, as expensive and rare drugs and treatments that the NHS will not cover continue to proliferate. Thus, there has been a call for expanded access and coverage to such expensive and innovative care under the NHS--even while funding has been cut."

Tags:medications, pharmacy, healthcare

Abstract
This paper presents an extensive review of the effects of HMOs to medical care in the U.S. and England. This paper concludes that HMOs demonstrated that they can be effective in the delivery of health care to any population group, including poor communities and low-income persons and households who live outside of poor communities. The author states that HMOs and other managed care organizations have in the past, are now and likely will continue in the future to sacrifice the care required by any population group that threatens to impinge on the bottom-line of these organizations.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Research Questions
HMOs as Health Care Providers
Access to Care through HMOs
Effects of HMOs and Managed Care on Hospitals and Low-Income Patients
Capitation
Purchaser-Oriented Management and Practice Guidelines
Case Management
Performance Analysis
Medicaid and HMOs: A Direct Impact on Poor Communities and On Low-Income Persons and Households
HMOs and Care Quality
Health Care Delivery in the United States Compared With the United Kingdom
National Health Care System in the UK
Similarities & Differences between the National Health Care Systems in the United Kingdom and the United States
The Case for Universality
Conclusions

From the Paper
"Over the past 50 years, managed care programs have existed such as the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program (California) and the Health Insurance Plan of New York City. These programs only affected a minority of patients and physicians, until the past six or seven years during which managed care has grown significantly. Rising costs of health care, particularly in industry, and the fact that approximately 15 percent of the United States population lacks health insurance, have provided stimulus for this growth. Health care expenditures account for over 14 percent of the gross domestic product in the United States. Management of medical services is attempted through managed care. It is estimated that around 100 million individuals are now covered by a managed care plan and that 77 percent of employers offer a managed care program."

Tags:managed, care, cost, kaiser, england

Abstract
This paper explores the health system provided by the government of Kuwait. The paper explains how the Kuwaiti government offers free health care to all of its citizens, at any age and in any circumstance. This generous system also extends to the animals and livestock owned by Kuwaiti's. The paper includes an analysis of the medical education system and training for doctors as well as the financing and implementation of it all. The paper also makes some brief comparisons to other countries' health systems.

From the Paper
"The doctors and nurses and medical technicians that implement hands-on health care in the clinics and hospitals are trained in the following facilities: the Faculty of Medicine University (established in 1973); the College of Medical Science and Allied Health (built in 1982); and the College of Pharmacy and College of Dentistry (established in February, 1996). These facilities are the result of an ordinance issued by the Amir in July, 1973; or, in other words, a decree."

Tags:doctor, medical, nurse, livestock, arab, muslim, government, amir, decree

Abstract
This paper presents an in-depth examination of he Canadian health system, which is based on the Canada Health Act. According to the paper, this Act is Canada's federal legislation for publicly funded health care insurance. The Act is set out to be a basis for Canadian public health care policy with the aim to protect protect, promote and restore the physical and mental well-being of residents of Canada and to facilitate reasonable access to health services without financial or other barriers.

From the Paper
"The Canadian health system is based on the Canada Health Act, Canada's "federal legislation for publicly funded health care insurance" (Health Canada "Canada Health Act"). The Act is set out to be a basis for Canadian public health care policy with the aim to protect "protect, promote and restore the physical and mental well-being of residents of Canada and to facilitate reasonable access to health services without financial or other barriers" (ibid). The health system is based upon five principles, which..."

Tags:canada, healthcare, principles

From the Paper
"NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE UNITED STATES
Summary of Recent History of the Issue
Health care costs in the United States, as a proportion of gross national product, increased from 1981' 8.1 percent to 1990' 12.2 percent. Health care spending as a proportion of gross domestic product is higher in the United States than in any other country (Heidenheimer, Heclo, & Adams, 1995). Such spending is three-times higher in the United States than in the United Kingdom. Such a differential might be justified if health outcomes in the United States were clearly superior to this in Britain. Health outcomes in the United States, however, are often inferior to those in the United Kingdom (Appleby, 1992). Infant mortality is 10 percent more prevalent in the United States than in Britain. Male life expectancy in Britain is four.."

Abstract
This paper examines the implications of a two-tier health care system, which is a national form that is in place in a number of countries. The two tiers are the public health care system, which is generally guaranteed for all citizens and the private health care system. The latter typically is expensive and offers shorter waits alongside better treatment for recipients. The paper further cites that the problem with a two-tier system of health care is that the public system may not be able to provide adequate health care to the less fortunate, as resources and precedence is given to those who have paid for private health care.

From the Paper
"Critics of a two-tier health care system suggest it is unfair and may dilute the public system's ability to provide quality healthcare to the less fortunate. Explain the critics' rationale for their dire assessment. A two-tier health care system is a national form that is in place in a number of countries. The two tiers are: 1. the public health care system (which is generally guaranteed for all citizens) and 2. the private health care system. The latter typically is expensive and offers shorter service queues alongside "better" treatment for recipients. The problem with a two-tier system of health care is thus that the public system may not be able to provide adequate healthcare to the less fortunate, as resources..."

Tags:two, tier, health

Abstract
This paper provides a detailed overview of the health care systems in the United Kingdom (UK), Canada, and the United States (US), including the perceptions of the citizen who experience the highest degree of illness. In response to the question of whether nationalized health care can be a public good, the paper states that when dealing with the concept of universal or nationalized health care, where a government has decided that all or nearly all citizens have a right to access care and it is funded through some form of government compensation program, health care then becomes a non-excludable public good that can be consumed by multiple consumers. The author also shares personal experience of health care in the US, and suggests how the situation would have been handled differently in the UK or Canada. The paper concludes that the true test will be if the plan can find a balance between the high rates of patient satisfaction found in nationalized plans, without sacrificing the choice and arguable benefits of a relatively open market system.

Outline:
Introduction
Purpose of Paper
A Framework for Comparison
Literature Review
Canada
Overview of the Canadian System
Health System View Among Sicker Adults
Great Britain
Overview of the United Kingdom's National Health Service
Health System View Among Sicker Adults
United States
Overview of the System
Health System View Among Sicker Adults
Can Nationalized Health Care Be A Public Good?
Personal Experience
Summary
Works Cited

From the Paper
"As the number of uninsured citizens grows increasingly closer to 50 million, which is approximately 15% of the population, improved health care coverage has dominated the American political debate, (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2006). Understanding the benefits and disadvantages of nationalizing certain aspects of the American health care and health insurance markets is a topic that should interest many Americans, as it could impact on how we seek health care for many years to come. Several of the perceived advantages to expanding coverage through some form of government plan are; access to health care that is currently unavailable to the uninsured; a perceived reduction in costs to the consumer, and a higher satisfaction with the level of health care delivered. All of these seem to be desirable objectives. However, the quest for these improvements may lead to several substantial negative side effects. Increasing health care coverage for US citizens through some form of an interlinked state or federal plan could lead to a reduction in efficiency of the current largely private health insurance market by reducing competition. Therefore, these changes may simply alter how health care is rationed in the US by moving from monetary to time rationing."

Tags:rationing, cost, time, debate, socialized, medicine