In comparison to the United States (U. S. ) and Canada’s health care delivery system, U. S. spends much more on health care than Canada. The Canadian system is predominantly publicly financed, whereas the American one is funded primarily through a private system. To have a better understanding of both systems, there are four standards to follow: One of those standards is: ACCESS, “freedom or ability to obtain or make use of something” (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 2003). Despite higher U. S. evels of spending on health care, residents in the two countries have similar health status and access to care, although there are higher levels of inequality in the United States (Health Affairs, 2006). In Canada every citizen has coverage, but approximately 1. 2 million Canadians do not have access. Few of the reason for this is because they can’t find a regular doctor or because they haven’t looked for one. In U. S. , 60% have health insurance either because the government provided, some because private corporations offered and some because they pay for their own directly.
Second standard is: COST, value of money that has been used up to produce something, and hence is not available for use anymore ((Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia-2008). Yet infant mortality in the United States is higher and life expectancy at birth is less than in Canada. It is also noteworthy that despite Canada’s much lower expenditures on health care, Canadians consult with physicians far more often than do Americans. The average number of physician consultations per capita was 6. 0 in Canada, versus 3. 8 in the United States (Economic Snapshot-Ross Eisenbrey, 2007).
In Canada since the government is the insurer, Canadian’s pay higher taxes for health care. In the U. S. , 44 million of citizens are uninsured, the government pay for elderly and poor population and private physicians set their own fees. Third standard is: QUALITY, peculiar and essential character. In the aspects of health care it can be define as a quality assurance “a program for the systematic monitoring and evaluation of the various aspects of a project, service or facility to ensure that the standards of quality are met (Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 2003).
The quality of health care in Canada differs from U. S. due to Canadian’s has been slightly slower to adopt expensive technology and medicines. Even though that in 2000, World Health Organization ranked Canada 30th versus U. S. was ranked 37th. One of the biggest problems about the quality of health Care in U. S. is lack of preventive care, medical mistakes, and substandard care for chronic conditions and health care disparities. Last standard is CONTINUITY, something that has exhibits, or provides continuity. Few ways to determine continuity of health care in U. S. s by analyzing patient’s and physician’s level of satisfaction, and by following the guidelines of JCAHO (Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations’). Canada has a relatively good primary care orientation in its health care system, but it has only a moderate degree of continuity. Canada’s universal health care insurance system contrasts with the mixed system of the United States: universal care for seniors, private health care insurance for many, and no or intermittent coverage for others. These countries are also notably different in the extent of income and racial/ethnic inequalities.
It is within this context that this study compares the relative strength of the relationships between social, economic, and demographic factors (sex, age, marital status, income, education, country of birth, and race/ethnicity) and health status in Canada and the United States. Evidence drawn from the 2002-2003 Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health reveals that the correlations between these factors, above all country of birth and race/ethnicity, and health are relatively stronger in the United States, reflecting differences in health care access and racial/ethnic-based inequalities between the countries.
The study findings are suggestive of the effects of universal access to health care and more equitable distribution of other social resources in protecting the health of the general population (SEDAP, 2006). REFERENCES: 1. Canadian and American health care systems compared (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2006) [On-line]. Available: http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems_compared#Coverage_and_access 2. Contrasting Inequalities: Comparing Correlates of Health in Canada and the United States (SEDAP, Research Paper No. 167, 2006) [On-line]. Available: http://socserv. cmaster. ca/sedap 3. Economic Snapshot, (Ross Eisenbrey, 2007) Download the following OECD document for source data on physician consultations: http://dx. doi. org/10. 1787. 114051107728 4. Health Affairs, 25, no. 4 (2006): 1133-1142 doi: 10. 1377/hlthaff. 25. 4. 1133 © 2006 by Project HOPE. [On-line]. Available: http://content. healthaffairs. org/cgi/content/abstract/25/4/1133 5. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition, 2003 (Pages 7, 1017) 6. Quality of Health Care in the United States: A Chartbook, Sheila Leatherman, Ph. D. and Douglas McCarthy, The Commonwealth Fund, April 2002