Different Health Systems

The healthc atomic number 18 administration of the United States is commonly associated with state-of-the-art hospitals and highly-trained physician. However, the general performance of the U. S. healthcargon organisation has been determined to be a less than that of other industrialized countries. such observation is mainly due to the differences in healthcare arrangings among states, regions and health administrations. The Veterans wellness validation (VHA) is a socialized healthcare system managed by the government. It provides change healthcare support to veterans or ex-officio military servicemen and their families.Survey shows that approximately 83% of VHA patients are satisfied with the healthcare that they have received. In addition, survey depicts that 69% of the patients were handle within 20 minutes of their appropriate appointment with their physician (DeNavas-Walt et al. , 2005). Also, approximately 93% of the patients participating in the survey indicate th at they had seen a specialist within the last 30 days. Such observations show that the Veterans health Administration provides an exemplary system of healthcare, much better than the clannish sector.However, it also could mingy that the VHA is associated with more represently healthcare rates than the other healthcare systems such as the Military wellness system and the private sector. This characteristic compensates for the types of members that would advantage of the VHA benefits, who are actually veterans, which are commonly composed of older, sicker and illness-susceptible individuals. In addition, these veterans are by and large poorer, homeless and victims of substance abuse, which represents a major(ip) difference from the major population in the United States.It has been estimated that more than 50% of the VHA enrollees are to a higher place 65 years of age. The private sectors healthcare system is mostly focused on intervention-based healthcare, which means that the physician will primarily treat a patient who is already suffering from a fussy illness (Frogner and Anderson, 2006). Such system is thus less costly than the VHA system, because the patients enrolled in the private sector will only resort to requesting aesculapian fear when the need arises.In the private sector healthcare system, health insurance is generally bought by the employer on behalf of its employees The VHA system, on the other hand, follows the prevention approach to health care, which involves providing checkups and education to its veteran patients in order to avoid more sound illness in the future. The Military Health System, on the other hand, provides healthcare to individuals who are currently active in the military service, including members of their family.The benefits of the Military Health system falls under the blanket coverage known as the Tricare, which is almost identical to that of the private sectors system of healthcare management (Smith et al. , 200 5). Here the enrollee pays a small portion of the total cost of the healthcare service, such as 20% of a surgery, for example, and the other 80% is paid for my the Military Health System. Each visit to the physician, just exchangeable the private sectors healthcare system, is associated with a small co-payment, such as $10 per visit, regardless of specialization of the doctor to which consultation was made.The boot of a healthcare system is to provide medical services at the lowest practical price and at the same time, with the best workable quality. The integration of electronic medical records in the Veterans Health Administration has provided a model for the other healthcare system to follow suit. In addition, the private sector has also use the VHAs mission in providing prevention-based medical services, instead of just intervention-based services.ReferencesDeNavas-Walt C, Proctor B and Lee C (2005) Income, exiguity and Health Insurance in the United States 2004. Washington, D .C. U.S. Census Bureau.Frogner BK and Anderson GF (2006) international comparisons of health systems data, 2005. New York The Commonwealth Fund.Smith C, Cowan C and Sensenig A (2005) Health Spending Growth Slows in 2003. Health Affairs 24(1)18594.