On many occasions this blog has made the point that, despite frequently-repeated claims that
the US has “the best healthcare in the world”, we do not. This point is also
made by dozens of other sources, recently including Kaiser Health News (KHN)
editor-in-chief Elisabeth Rosenthal in her book “American Sickness”. In my
book, “Health,
Medicine and Justice: Designing a fair and equitable health care system”,
and in many lectures I have given to physicians and students, I have cited the “37th
in the world” ranking the US achieved in
the comprehensive World Health
Organization (WHO) report of 2000. The report’s Table 10, available as a
pdf at that site, indeed lists the US as #37 in Overall Performance, just below Costa Rica and just above Slovenia. On an equally telling scale, Performance on Health Level (measured by Disability-Adjusted Life
Expectancy, DALE) the US ranked #72, between Argentina and Bhutan. When many US
news media l ed their stories with “Just ahead of Slovenia!”, the Slovenian ambassador
took exception, noting that his country was working hard to improve their people's
health status.
But, as I also pointed out in
my lectures, this table is old, based on 1997 data, and I use it because it is
the last time that WHO released such rankings. I supplement it with newer data,
such as the Commonwealth Fund’s “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall” from 2014. This
compares fewer countries, albeit appropriate, developed, wealthy, OECD
countries. In this study, the US also ranks last overall and in many subscales;
I have published this graphic before as well.
Now, we have new rankings to
refer to, the Bloomberg Global HealthIndex from 2017. It would be nice to be able to say that the US had moved
up from the 2000 WHO report, but now, at #34 (and still just behind Costa Rica)
the change is really insignificant. Slovenia, it might be noted, has moved up, to #27, so maybe their
efforts are paying off!
Given the recalcitrance of US health status to
improvement, it is obviously important to look at the ”why” as well as the
“what could be done?”. This is especially now, given that these ranking do not
yet reflect any negative impact that may happen through the repeal of the
Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its replacement by a a Republican plan
(#Trumpcare). The contents of the bill that the Senate is currently working on,
and which Majority Leader McConnell hopes to bring to a vote by July 4, remain
secret not only to the public but also, apparently, to many or most senators.
Therefore, the bill passed by the House of Representatives, the American Health
Care Act (AHCA) remains our best guide to what the final plan may look like.
And it is not encouraging;
the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that 23 million Americans willlose health insurance, about equally from loss of Medicaid expansion and from cuts to support for the health insurance
exchanges set up by ACA. This will unquestionably mean that the overall health
status of Americans will go down, both in absolute terms and relative to other
nations. Without health insurance, people will not access health care,
especially for prevention and “minor” problems (or problems that are not really
minor but so far not, or minimally, symptomatic). This means that by the time
that their health is so bad that they seek care, they are less likely to
survive or do well, and also that the cost of their care will be far higher.
This is not a plan to most efficiently use healthcare dollars to maximize the
health of the American people.
So what is going on? In a recent
blog post (“Pre-existing
conditions and profit-taking: the causes of our healthcare problems, May
29, 2017) I wrote “The AHCA is basically
a tax-cut-for-the-1% bill, with the money coming from the health care coverage
for the rest of us.” That is true, but the question that still needs to be
answered is “why”? Ultimately, it is a question of values: if the goal was to
have the best possible health status for the American people, rich or poor,
white or black, native born or immigrant, rural or urban, this would not be the
system that we have and #Trumpcare would be designed to fix the problems with
the ACA, not to exacerbate them. President Trump and the GOP have emphasized,
in the campaign and since, that for many the ACA has not made insurance
accessible because the premiums are too high. This is a good point, and a
solution would be great; unfortunately, the AHCA would make them higher, and
price out far more people. The values of the Republican leadership are clearly
to maximize tax cuts and other financial benefits to the richest American people
and corporations, and this AHCA will do. The perpetrators are not among those
at the margins; even those congresspersons and pundits who are not truly wealthy
have outstanding health insurance for life, and are certain that they will not
be in the marginalized group, and that they will be able to access the “best
health care in the world”.
Of course, even when you have
great insurance and access to “everything”, it is not always better. Sometimes
if you are too well-insured you get too much care, tests and procedures and
drugs that can put you at risk of harm. And even in the “best” facilities
things don’t always go well – medical errors are common, communication can be poor,
and even when there are no screwups bad things can happen. Donald Berwick, head
of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI),
and former interim head of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)
talks about the US perhaps having the best “rescue care” in the world. But even
that is not so good; many IHI initiatives are focused on changing that system to work better,
including improvement capability, patient safety, and population health. Anyone
who has been sick, or in the hospital, or had a close friend or relative in
such a situation recently, can testify to the failings of our health care
delivery system even for the well-insured.
So the situation in the US
was not good up until now, and will almost certainly get worse with #Trumpcare.
Many of the people who will suffer most are those who voted for the President
and the GOP members of Congress. Maybe they think that the bad things will not
happen to them and their families, but only to “others”. But they will, and we need to move up in the
rankings, to be closer to other OECD countries.
Maybe the solution for the US
is not to mimic France, or Italy, or Canada. But whatever the solution is, it has
to pass the empiric “does it make our people’s health better?” test. And
clearly #Trumpcare will not.
1 comment:
At some point we are going to need to deal with the more fundamental issues underlying poor health, namely poverty. While better access to health care services for the poor is helpful, it will not change the underlying problem of the health gradient. As researchers such as Marmot and Wilkinson have repeatedly shown, countries that have the largest disparities in wealth , the U.S. currently has the largest gap, consistently have the worst overall health measures. As someone who has provided primary care to homeless and desperately poor urban populations for the past 32 years, I am personally tired of trying to figure out how to patch together patients whose bodies have been ravaged by the structural violence of poverty, racism, trauma, and other forms of discrimination. Better access to care will help these patients to deal with the symptoms of structural violence, but the underling disease goes merrily on.
Post a Comment