HES380 Assignment 4 Nicole

Nicole LaForest AC1605718 Managed Healthcare January 5, 2019 Freya Bundey’s article elaborates about the dynamicity of Australia’s Healthcare system in recent days. Overtly, the government is gradually but relevant ...

Nicole LaForest AC1605718 Managed Healthcare January 5, 2019 Freya Bundey’s article elaborates about the dynamicity of Australia’s Healthcare system in recent days. Overtly, the government is gradually but relevantly implementing strategies in the quest to minimize state-sponsored medical services. In the year 2014, the Liberal-National Party Coalition introduced a compulsory fee of $7 on every employed citizen, as a co-payment fee for all General Practitioner (GP) visits. Characteristically, the policy is meant to compel the public to pay for their medical services. In the past, the Australian government used to pay for the majority of the health costs incurred by its citizens. However, the GP levy is meant to ensure citizens are held accountable for their health status. Notable constructs that accompany the GP co-payment fee is an increase in payments made for pharmaceutical benefits and freezing of all non-GP related aspects. In light of such developments, it is evident that the majority of the Australians are likely to pay more for health services. The cost of visiting a regular physician based on the GP demands is destined to increase rapidly. The Australian government supports the proposition, stating that it would save the country substantial revenue, which would be channeled into other meaningful courses. However, the GP co-payment proposal faced considerable criticism from many quotas in the Australian society. Notably, opponents of the policy argue that the government has dealt a significant blow to the healthcare sector especially on the aspect of the equal distribution of health. Their views are logical since compelling each citizen to pay for medical services would practically marginalize the low-income earners. Mental health is a vital aspect in the wellbeing and positive health status of a given social setting. Numerous governments strive to instill strategies to ensure patients receive psychiatric health care during treatment of their various conditions, as part of healthcare integration approaches. According to the authors, improving assessment and diagnostic procedures for mental health conditions is critical to the consistent efforts implemented in the quest to uphold a healthy population. Despite these factors, it is evident that the majority of healthcare centers do not incorporate aspects promoting mental health. In the United States, for instance, many patients with behavioral health disorders do not receive appropriate care on their predicaments. However, reliable data from the Bureau of Primary Care at the Health Resource s and Services, many patients lack adequate access to mental and behavioral service care due to numerous barriers. Notably, the minimal number of trained staff specializing in mental health, coupled with open health centers means that the prevalence of mental disabilities and substance abuse among the population is likely to be high. The researchers applied the 56-item Assessment of Behavioral Health Services Survey to analyze numerous elements regarding healthcare integration. Characteristically, healthcare integration is an aspect practiced in many hospitals. Despite this impressive fact, it is categorically essential to note that care centers which embrace behavioral and mental service care are likely to enjoy an endowment of better facilities. For this reason, it is crucial to increase financial incentives and appropriate technical assistance to warrant maximization of the potential of healthcare service integration. The article succinctly elaborates of the relationship between resource consumption during treatment and the severity of a disease. The author begins by developing background information regarding resource consumption concerning case mix index. The researchers argue that case mix emerges as an ultimate reflection of the risks that could impact patients within a specific hospital. Thus, the model acts as a measuring tool for performances in a hospital facility. Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs) is another aspect that the authors address in an argument that it is another tool that could be used to gauge the performance of a hospital facility. The authors argue that a hospital could use CMI using DRGs and ICD codes. The researchers adopted the same method in measuring the performance of US hospitals, which is a similar technique that Centers for Medicare and Medicare services between 2011 and 2012. The authors also examined data from the ministry of hospitalization through an application of Structured Query Language (SQL) together with ICD-10 discharge information such as patients’ demographic information. The authors chose to develop the patients' ICD code by dividing the average cost of the systems, but they excluded ICD weights in this study that involved 26% of category A hospitals. The research findings showed that the total value for CMI-ICDC for the 122 hospitals was 1.13. Besides, the histogram showed a highly skewed distribution. Additionally, an analysis of CMI-ICDC categories showed that category A hospitals have a higher mean of about 1.27 as compared to category C and D health facilities. The authors concluded that hospitals with a higher qualification have a more uppercase mix as compared to hospitals with a lower index. Nonetheless, the authors called for the development of better mechanisms for measuring performance in health facilities, as they claimed that the current systems of measurement could be unfair and that there is possible inefficiency in the accreditation categories and processes. For instance, the researchers established that hospital with 100 beds has a higher CMI as compared to facilities with less than 50 beds. The author focused his interest on the healthcare policies in the United States. Martin (2010) argues that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) became part of US jurisdiction in March 2010. Apart from Obamacare, the author also contends that the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act are also other laws that promoted a total change in the US healthcare system. The federal government accepted this law after a realization that about 48 million Americans failed to access health due to various reasons. Thus, ACA was intended to ease the burden of obtaining health among Americans. Besides, it is a law that facilitates a reduction of the number of people, who cannot access quality health. The bill ensures that the insurers offer equal access to health coverage to all Americans regardless of their background. For a long time, most American families struggled to achieve access to health due to lack of equal chances to access to health. However, ACA ensures that insurers offer a similar premium for all categories of patients.