Skip to main content

OECD data reveals shortcomings of privatized US health care

Here's the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD's) latest report on U.S. health care funding.
The United States spent 17.4% of GDP on health in 2009, much more than the OECD average of 9.6%.
Details: Spending per person is two-and-a-half times higher than the OECD average. Total health spending accounted for 17.4% of GDP in the United States in 2009, by far the highest share in the OECD. Following the United States were the Netherlands, France and Germany, which allocated respectively 12.0%, 11.8% and 11.6% of their GDP to health. The OECD average was 9.6%.  
The United States also ranks far ahead of other OECD countries in health spending per capita, with spending of 7,960 USD in 2009, two-and-a-half times greater than the OECD average of 3,233 USD (adjusted for purchasing power parity).
With less than half of health care funded by the public sector in the USA (compared to 72% for the 34 developed countries in the OECD) and with for-profit corporations playing a large role in U.S. health care, the US is the leading model of  privatization.  If 'leading' is the right word.

The OECD has a special report on high US health care spending.  It notes:
  • Hospital spending is higher than in five other OECD countries which spend a lot on health care (Germany, Switzerland, France, Japan, and Canada).
  • Spending on Ambulatory care providers – that is, physicians and specialists as well as dentists -- is much higher than in the other high spending OECD countries
  •  Spending on Pharmaceuticals and medical goods is higher in the US than in any other country.
  •  Spending on Public Health and Administration is particularly high – more than two-and-a-half times the average. Administration of the US health system alone accounts for about 7% share of total spending. In comparison, Canada and Japan devote around 4% of health spending on administration. (The high US administrative costs are driven, no doubt, by its inefficient, multi-payer, privatized insurance system.)
Prices in the privatized US system are high:  "the evidence suggests that prices for health services and goods are substantially higher in the United States than elsewhere."

Mark Pearson, the head of the OECD Health Division told Reuters that one reason prices are higher in the United States is that the healthcare system lacks what other countries have: an effective government mechanism that acts to keep prices down. "That's simply not there in the U.S. system. So it's a structural defect," he said.

Kaiser asks: "So what are Americans getting for their money? The U.S. has the best five-year survival rate for breast cancer and comes in second, behind Japan, in terms of colorectal cancer survival.  But the U.S. ranks 27th in life expectancy at birth, 31st in premature mortality, and 25th in the rate of cardiovascular mortality. The U.S. has the second worst rate of adult diabetes, behind Mexico, and has the highest rate of adult obesity, at 34 percent."


Popular posts from this blog

Health care funding falls, again

Real provincial government health care funding per-person has fallen again this year in Ontario, the third year in a row.  Since 2009 real funding per-person has fallen 2.6% -- $63 per person. 

Across Canada real per person funding is in its fourth consecutive year of increase. Since 2009, real provincial funding across Canada is up $89 -- 3.6%.
In fact the funding gap between Ontario and Canada as a whole has gown consistently for years (as set out below in current dollars).

Ontario funds health care less than any other province -- indeed, the province that funds health care the second least (B.C.) provides $185 more per person per year, 4.7% more.  
Provincial health care spending in the rest of Canada (excluding Ontario) is now  $574 higher per person annually than in Ontario. 

 Ontario has not always provided lower than average health care funding increases-- but that has been the general pattern since 2005.
Private expenditures on health care have exceeded Ontario government increases …

Ontario long-term care staffing falls far short of other provinces

CUPE and others are campaigning for a legislated minimum average of four worked hours of nursing and personal care per resident per day in long-term care (LTC) facilities.  New research indicates that not only is LTC underfunded in Ontario, it is also understaffed compared to the other provinces. 
LTC staffing falls short:  The latest data published by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (and based on a mandatory survey undertaken by Statistics Canada) indicates that staffing at long-term care (LTC) facilities falls far short of other provinces. 
Part of this is driven by a low level of provincial funding for LTC.

Ontario has 0.575 health care full-time equivalent employees (FTEs) per bed staffed and in operation.[1]  The rest of Canada reports 0.665 health care FTEs.[2] The rest of Canada has 15.7% more health care staff per bed staffed and in operation than Ontario.[3] 

No other province reports fewer LTC health care staff per resident (or per bed) than Ontario.[4]

Occupancy r…

Six more problems with Public Private Partnerships (P3s)

The Auditor General (AG) has again identified issues in her annual reportwhich reflect problems with Ontario health care capacity and privatization.   First, here are six key problems with the maintenance of the 16 privatized P3 ("public private partnership") hospitals in Ontario:
There are long-term ongoing disputes with privatized P3 contractors over the P3 agreements, including about what is covered by the P3  (or “AFP” as the government likes to call them) contract.The hospitals are required to pay higher than reasonable rates tothe P3 contractor for  maintenance work the contractor has deemed to be outside of the P3 contract. Hospitals are almost forced to use P3 contractors to do maintenance work the contractors deem outside of the P3 contract or face the prospect of transferring the risk associated with maintaining the related hospital assets from the private-sector company back to the hospitalP3 companies with poor perf…