An Enhanced Healthcare Delivery System Model for the US

Author(s):  
Raj Selladurai ◽  
Roshini Isabell Selladurai

This chapter focuses on developing an enhanced US healthcare delivery system model by learning from the “best” healthcare systems in the world and adapting some of their best working principles to the existing US healthcare system. These global systems include the Swiss healthcare system, which is considered one of the best in the world, and some of the other leading healthcare systems such as the German, the UK, French, Italian, and Singaporean. It would also explore, among a few alternatives, the state innovation-based approach to healthcare reform. Major concerns such as cost containment, affordability, flexibility, accessibility, feasibility, and implementation-related issues have been addressed.

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-126
Author(s):  
Patrick A. Rivers

The US healthcare delivery system, by all accounts, is the most advanced and sophisticated healthcare system in the world. Clinical advances in diagnostic and therapeutic regimens, superior performance in biomedical research, and the development and use of the latest management and medical technologies are all hallmarks of the system. While the US healthcare system has been extremely successful, concerns remain about access to care for a large segment of the population. This article examined the various approaches that have been adopted and those that are being proposed to bridge the existing gap in health insurance coverage. The underlying assumptions of the proposed strategies were examined, and the conditions necessary for the successful implementation of these strategies were also discussed.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen H. Wang ◽  
Zoé M. Hendrickson ◽  
Hannah R. Friedman ◽  
Maxine A. Nunez ◽  
Marcella Nunez-Smith

AbstractBackgroundThe US Virgin Islands (USVI) are actively rebuilding their healthcare delivery system following destruction by Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017.MethodsIn 2013, we conducted a qualitative study in the US Virgin Islands using semi-structured one-on-one interviews to explore individuals’ decision-making regarding healthcare-seeking off-island. The coding team analyzed the transcripts using a constant comparative analysis, and Atlas.ti to organize our emerging thematic analysis.ResultsFive themes emerged from 19 interviews that illustrate healthcare system level factors that influence participants’ decisions about seeking healthcare off-island: 1) limited availability of services and desire for options, 2) limited accessibility of services, 3) healthcare system interactions and experiences, 4) healthcare system policies, and 5) trust in healthcare systems.ConclusionsThe experiences of care seeking off-island for our sample highlight several mechanisms through which the USVI healthcare delivery system could improve, including the adoption of telemedicine, changes in insurance, and healthcare workforce policies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 957-962 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jedrek Wosik ◽  
Marat Fudim ◽  
Blake Cameron ◽  
Ziad F Gellad ◽  
Alex Cho ◽  
...  

Abstract The novel coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has altered our economy, society, and healthcare system. While this crisis has presented the U.S. healthcare delivery system with unprecedented challenges, the pandemic has catalyzed rapid adoption of telehealth, or the entire spectrum of activities used to deliver care at a distance. Using examples reported by U.S. healthcare organizations, including ours, we describe the role that telehealth has played in transforming healthcare delivery during the 3 phases of the U.S. COVID-19 pandemic: (1) stay-at-home outpatient care, (2) initial COVID-19 hospital surge, and (3) postpandemic recovery. Within each of these 3 phases, we examine how people, process, and technology work together to support a successful telehealth transformation. Whether healthcare enterprises are ready or not, the new reality is that virtual care has arrived.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen M. J. Azar ◽  
Catherine Nasrallah ◽  
Nina K. Szwerinski ◽  
John J. Petersen ◽  
Meghan C. Halley ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Group-based Diabetes Prevention Programs (DPP), aligned with recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, promote clinically significant weight loss and reduce cardio-metabolic risks. Studies have examined implementation of the DPP in community settings, but less is known about its integration in healthcare systems. In 2010, a group-based DPP known as the Group Lifestyle Balance (GLB) was implemented within a large healthcare delivery system in Northern California, across three geographically distinct regional administration divisions of the organization within 12 state counties, with varying underlying socio-demographics. The regional divisions implemented the program independently, allowing for natural variation in its real-world integration. We leveraged this natural experiment to qualitatively assess the implementation of a DPP in this healthcare system and, especially, its fidelity to the original GLB curriculum and potential heterogeneity in implementation across clinics and regional divisions. Methods Using purposive sampling, we conducted semi-structured interviews with DPP lifestyle coaches. Data were analyzed using mixed-method techniques, guided by an implementation outcomes framework consisting of eight constructs: acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. Results We conducted 33 interviews at 20 clinics across the three regional administrative divisions. Consistencies in implementation of the program were found across regions in terms of satisfaction with the evidence base (acceptability), referral methods (adoption), eligibility criteria (fidelity), and strategies to increase retention and effectiveness (sustainability). Heterogeneity in implementation across regions were found in all categories, including: the number and frequency of sessions (fidelity); program branding (adoption); lifestyle coach training (adoption), and patient-facing cost (cost). Lifestyle coaches expressed differing attitudes about curriculum content (acceptability) and suitability of educational level (appropriateness). While difficulties with recruitment were common across regions (feasibility), strategies used to address these challenges differed (sustainability). Conclusions Variation exists in the implementation of the DPP within a large multi-site healthcare system, revealing a dynamic and important tension between retaining fidelity to the original program and tailoring the program to meet the local needs. Moreover, certain challenges across sites may represent opportunities for considering alternative implementation to anticipate these barriers. Further research is needed to explore how differences in implementation domains impact program effectiveness.


Complexity ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inas S. Khayal ◽  
Amro M. Farid

In recent years, healthcare needs have shifted from treating acute conditions to meeting an unprecedented chronic disease burden. The healthcare delivery system has structurally evolved to address two primary features of acute care: the relatively short time period, on the order of a patient encounter, and the siloed focus on organs or organ systems, thereby operationally fragmenting and providing care by organ specialty. Much more so than acute conditions, chronic disease involves multiple health factors with complex interactions between them over a prolonged period of time necessitating a healthcare delivery model that is personalized to achieve individual health outcomes. Using the current acute-based healthcare delivery system to address and provide care to patients with chronic disease has led to significant complexity in the healthcare delivery system. This presents a formidable systems’ challenge where the state of the healthcare delivery system must be coordinated over many years or decades with the health state of each individual that seeks care for their chronic conditions. This paper architects a system model for personalized healthcare delivery and managed individual health outcomes. To ground the discussion, the work builds upon recent structural analysis of mass-customized production systems as an analogous system and then highlights the stochastic evolution of an individual’s health state as a key distinguishing feature.


Esculapio ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-4
Author(s):  
Sonikpreet Aulakh ◽  
Asher Chanan Khan

COVID-19 pandemic has exposed vulnerabilities all across the global healthcare systems including those within the United States. A systematic evaluation of these soft spots has been crucial in order to reengineer the healthcare system for enhanced competences and superior quality of care. One area that has been undoubtedly affected is the diagnosis and management of neoplastic diseases. The healthcare system in the US witnessed an instantaneous implementation of a “social distancing” strategy, which was implemented in an effort to flatten the infectivity “curve”. This required an urgent modification in the general administration of healthcare delivery, independent of COVID-19 infection status of a patient. For the non-COVID patients, it meant a shift from in-person to a virtual administration platform.''(Royce et al., 2020) Neither the healthcare providers, nor the patients, or the hospital management were adequately prepared for this sudden transition. Various healthcare services offered through these healthcare systems were required to be triaged based upon patients' assessment of needs into either emergent, urgent or routine/non- urgent. Patients seeking services that fell in the non- urgent/routine clinical visits were encouraged to stay home until the pandemic simmered down/resolved. This strategy was erroneously predicated on a rather short anticipated duration of the pandemic. As expected, cancer screening visits were deemed non- urgent and thus most healthcare facilities in and outside the US suspended these services, inadvertently compromising the timely diagnosis of neoplastic disorders.


Author(s):  
Richard Gearhart

AbstractIn this paper, I estimate country-level efficiency using a newer order-mestimator where I condition efficiency estimates on secondary environmental variables. This allows me to identify which variables influence the effectiveness of a healthcare delivery system. I find that not controlling for secondary environmental variables leads to the average OECD country being 11% inefficient; after controlling for demographics and economic (social protection) environmental variables, inefficiency reduces to 7% (5%). This provides evidence that a substantial part of the inefficiencies of a healthcare system is related to demographics, socioeconomics, and the structure of the healthcare delivery system. Using the second-stage results, I find lower healthcare spending, both as a percent of GDP and total out-of-pocket, as well as more of the population covered by public health insurance, is related to better efficiency. Lower fertility rates, lower immigration rates, higher incomes, and lower pharmaceutical doses are also consistent with better healthcare efficiency. Lastly, a healthcare system that provides a basic benefits package but allows for purchase of private health insurance, with moderate gatekeeping and flexibility to increase the budget for healthcare through public and private financing, are the most efficient healthcare systems.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e025892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Braithwaite ◽  
Yvonne Zurynski ◽  
Kristiana Ludlow ◽  
Joanna Holt ◽  
Hanna Augustsson ◽  
...  

IntroductionThere is wide recognition that, if healthcare systems continue along current trajectories, they will become harder to sustain. Ageing populations, accelerating rates of chronic disease, increasing costs, inefficiencies, wasteful spending and low-value care pose significant challenges to healthcare system durability. Sustainable healthcare systems are important to patients, society, policy-makers, public and private funders, the healthcare workforce and researchers. To capture current thinking about improving healthcare system sustainability, we present a protocol for the systematic review of grey literature to capture the current state-of-knowledge and to compliment a review of peer-reviewed literature.Methods and analysisThe proposed search strategy, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines, includes Google Advanced Search, snowballing techniques and targeted hand searching of websites of lead organisations such as WHO, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, governments, public policy institutes, universities and non-government organisations. Documents will be selected after reviewing document summaries. Included documents will undergo full-text review. The following criteria will be used: grey literature document; English language; published January 2013–March 2018; relevant to the healthcare delivery system; the content has international or national scope in high-income countries. Documents will be assessed for quality, credibility and objectivity using validated checklists. Descriptive data elements will be extracted: identified sustainability threats, definitions of sustainability, attributes of sustainable healthcare systems, solutions for improvement and outcome measures of sustainability. Data will be analysed using novel text-mining methods to identify common concept themes and meanings. This will be triangulated with the more traditional analysis and concept theming by the researchers.Ethics and disseminationNo primary data will be collected, therefore ethical approval will not be sought. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed literature, as conference presentations and as condensed summaries for policy-makers and health system partners.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018103076.


Author(s):  
Jan Abel Olsen

This chapter provides an overview of the healthcare delivery system. A figure illustrates how six different parts of the system relate to each other. The primary care level plays a key role in many countries by representing the gate, in which referrals to secondary care are being made. Tertiary care is principally of two types depending on patients’ prognosis: chronic care or rehabilitation. In addition to the three care levels, there are two parts with quite different roles: pharmacies provide pharmaceuticals, and sickness benefit schemes compensate the sick for their income losses. A recurrent policy challenge is to make each provider level take into account the resource implications of their isolated decisions outside of their own budgets. A brief discussion is included on the scope for ‘internal markets’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document