General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCanada Letter: Health Care Compared, NYTimes
(email)
By IAN AUSTEN at the NY Times
"SNIP...........
One of the most common complaints about the Canadian health care system is the duration of wait times. That was the reason that some judges favored other nations in The Upshots tournament-style comparison of various countries health systems. Indeed, fear of long wait times is one of the most commonly cited reasons people in the United States reject a single-payer health system.
...........
Lets acknowledge that, compared with patients elsewhere, those in Canada often have to wait longer for care. In the recent international comparison published by the Commonwealth Fund, only 43 percent of Canadians were able to see a doctor or nurse on the same or next day when they needed care, tying for last. Half of them had to wait two or more hours for care in the emergency room (again, last place). Thirty percent of them had to wait two or more months to see a specialist (last place), and 18 percent had to wait four or more months for elective surgery (last place).
...........
The reason for longer wait times in Canada is not because of the systems design. Its because of the systems spending. Canada spends, on average, about half of what the United States does for health care. Spending so much less has to have consequences, either decreased access or decreased quality.
We can quibble about various metrics, but the same Commonwealth Fund study that faulted Canada for access issues didnt find huge differences in outcomes. Canada beats the United States on population metrics, while the United States wins with respect to hospital-based ones. The United States also does well in cancer survival rates, but weve discussed why survival rates are flawed before. Canada may have longer wait times, but its hard to see how they are negatively affecting Canadians in comparison with Americans.
The bottom line is that while Canada does have longer wait times compared with other countries, it seems to have made the decision to accept this as a trade-off for significantly reduced spending. We can choose to value different things, but those wait times are most likely an economic decision, not one inherent to single-payer.
............SNIP"
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)especially when the ordering physician makes a nickel off them.
If we can insure everyone, and it means longer wait times for elective procedures, that's OK by me. The ultimate rationing is having people uninsured or with inadequate insurance.
It's going to take a lot of changes to make our system affordable -- physicians, hospital, other providers, equipment makers, drug companies, etc., are going to have the change their expectations. Patients are going to have to, as well.
applegrove
(118,492 posts)of tests which have so far ruled out anything bad. I just had to wait a few weeks for tests and results. I was low risk as they ruled out anything bad right away. I like canada's health care system.
panader0
(25,816 posts)and lose everything I own.
applegrove
(118,492 posts)panader0
(25,816 posts)I need to take Eliquis for a blot clot in my leg.
I picked up my month's supply today--$3.70.
With AHCCCS it would be $465.99.
For 60 very small pills.
applegrove
(118,492 posts)plan for regular people. Each province is different.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Sept. 18, 2017
To better understand one of the most heated U.S. policy debates, we created a tournament to judge which of these nations has the best health system: Canada, Britain, Singapore, Germany, Switzerland, France, Australia and the U.S.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/18/upshot/best-health-care-system-country-bracket.html?mcubz=0&_r=0
applegrove
(118,492 posts)Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)which was no problem, but I was told that the next appointment would be 8 weeks down the road.
What's this about wait times?