scholarly journals Mapping the Burden of COVID-19 in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian F. Miller ◽  
Alexander D. Becker ◽  
Bryan T. Grenfell ◽  
C. Jessica E. Metcalf
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
County Scale ◽  
Effective Distribution

AbstractAs of April 5th 2020, SARS-CoV-2 has resulted in over 273,000 confirmed infections in the United States of America. Incidence continues to rise. As the epidemic threatens to overwhelm health care systems, identifying regions where the expected disease burden is likely to be high relative to the rest of the country is critical for enabling prudent and effective distribution of emergency resources. Across all global regions affected by the pandemic, an elevated risk of severe outcomes has consistently been observed in older age groups. Using age-specific mortality patterns in tandem with demographic data, we map a projection of the cumulative burden of COVID-19 and the associated cumulative burden on the healthcare system at the county-scale in the United States for a scenario in which 20% of the population of each county acquires infection. We identify regions that may be particularly impacted relative to the rest of the country, and observe a general trend that per capita disease burden and relative healthcare system demand may be highest away from major population centers.

Continental Divide? The Attitudes of US and Canadian Oncologists on the Costs, Cost-Effectiveness, and Health Policies Associated With New Cancer Drugs

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (27) ◽  
pp. 4149-4153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott R. Berry ◽  
Chaim M. Bell ◽  
Peter A. Ubel ◽  
William K. Evans ◽  
Eric Nadler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Drug Costs ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Effective Treatments

Purpose Oncologists in the United States and Canada work in different health care systems, but physicians in both countries face challenges posed by the rising costs of cancer drugs. We compared their attitudes regarding the costs and cost-effectiveness of medications and related health policy. Methods Survey responses of a random sample of 1,355 United States and 238 Canadian medical oncologists (all outside of Québec) were compared. Results Response rate was 59%. More US oncologists (67% v 52%; P < .001) favor access to effective treatments regardless of cost, while more Canadians favor access to effective treatments only if they are cost-effective (75% v 58%; P < .001). Most (84% US, 80% Canadian) oncologists state that patient out-of-pocket costs influence their treatment recommendations, but less than half the respondents always or frequently discuss the costs of treatments with their patients. The majority of oncologists favor more use of cost-effectiveness data in coverage decisions (80% US, 69% Canadian; P = .004), but fewer than half the oncologists in both countries feel well equipped to use cost-effectiveness information. Majorities of oncologists favor government price controls (57% US, 68% Canadian; P = .01), but less than half favor more cost-sharing by patients (29% US, 41% Canadian; P = .004). Oncologists in both countries prefer to have physicians and nonprofit agencies determine whether drugs provide good value. Conclusion Oncologists in the United States and Canada generally have similar attitudes regarding cancer drug costs, cost-effectiveness, and associated policies, despite practicing in different health care systems. The results support providing education to help oncologists in both countries use cost-effectiveness information and discuss drug costs with their patients.

Governing Integrated Health Delivery Systems: Meeting Accountability Requirements

1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 12-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peggy Leatt ◽  
Sandra G. Leggatt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Target Population ◽  
The United States ◽  
Delivery Systems ◽  
Financing System ◽  
Health Delivery ◽  
Integrated Health ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Health Delivery Systems

Many Canadian provincial governments are exploring methods to increase the integration of health services in an effort to improve the care provided, while maintaining or reducing the costs. Integrated health delivery systems are being implemented in the United States, Britain and other European countries. Such systems aim to provide a full continuum of care to a defined target population under a financing system of capitation. This article explores the issues associated with the governance accountabilities of an IDS. A review of potential governance models is completed, and the factors that influence the choice of a governance model for an integrated delivery system are presented. In 1987, Ewell identified governing boards as the weakest link in the integrated health care systems of the United States. It is suggested that early attention to governance in the development of IDS models in Canada may improve the effectiveness of these systems.

Utilization of Health Care Coalitions and Resiliency Forums in the United States and United Kingdom: Different Approaches to Strengthen Emergency Preparedness

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Walsh ◽  
Allan Graeme Swan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Care Systems

ABSTRACTThe process for developing national emergency management strategies for both the United States and the United Kingdom has led to the formulation of differing approaches to meet similar desired outcomes. Historically, the pathways for each are the result of the enactment of legislation in response to a significant event or a series of events. The resulting laws attempt to revise practices and policies leading to more effective and efficient management in preparing, responding, and mitigating all types of natural, manmade, and technological hazards. Following the turn of the 21st century, each country has experienced significant advancements in emergency management including the formation and utilization of 2 distinct models: health care coalitions in the United States and resiliency forums in the United Kingdom. Both models have evolved from circumstances and governance unique to each country. Further in-depth study of both approaches will identify strengths, weaknesses, and existing gaps to meet continued and future challenges of our respective disaster health care systems. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2016;10:161–164)

scholarly journals Comparisons of Health Care Systems in the United States, Germany and Canada

2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Goran Ridic ◽  
Suzanne Gleason ◽  
Ognjen Ridic
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Systems
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document