Tag: countries

US spends most on health care but has worst health outcomes among high-income countries, new report finds



CNN
 — 

The United States spends far more on wellness care than any other superior-earnings country but continue to has the cheapest everyday living expectancy at start and the maximum fee of folks with multiple persistent illnesses, according to a new report from The Commonwealth Fund, an impartial study group.

The report, unveiled Tuesday, also suggests that in comparison with peer nations, the US has the optimum premiums of fatalities from avoidable or treatable results in and the highest maternal and infant demise costs.

“Americans are living shorter, significantly less balanced lives mainly because our wellness technique is not functioning as properly as it could be,” the report’s lead writer, Munira Gunja, senior researcher for The Commonwealth Fund’s Worldwide Program in Overall health Coverage and Follow Innovation, claimed in a information release. “To capture up with other large-earnings international locations, the administration and Congress would have to grow accessibility to health and fitness care, act aggressively to management fees, and devote in overall health fairness and social providers we know can lead to a much healthier inhabitants.”

Folks in the US see doctors a lot less usually than those in most other international locations, which is probably relevant to the US owning a under-ordinary quantity of working towards medical professionals, according to the report, and the US is the only state among those studied that does not have universal well being coverage. In 2021 by itself, 8.6{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of the US populace was uninsured.

“Not only is the U.S. the only region we analyzed that does not have common health protection, but its wellbeing system can seem created to discourage individuals from applying expert services,” scientists at the Commonwealth Fund, headquartered in New York, wrote in the report. “Affordability continues to be the best explanation why some Us citizens do not indication up for overall health protection, although superior out-of-pocket prices guide almost 50 {bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of operating-age grown ups to skip or delay finding needed treatment.”

The researchers analyzed health and fitness stats from international resources, like the Organisation for Financial Cooperation and Advancement, or OECD, which tracks and stories on knowledge from wellness methods across 38 large-cash flow nations. The info was extracted in December.

The scientists examined how the United States calculated from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. They also in comparison the US with the OECD ordinary for 38 large-earnings countries.

The data showed that in 2021 by yourself, the US used approximately 2 times as a lot as the typical OECD place on wellbeing care – and overall health expending in the US was 3 to four periods larger than in South Korea, New Zealand and Japan.

Globally, health and fitness care expending has been increasing considering the fact that the 1980s, in accordance to the report, driven generally by progress in clinical systems, the soaring expenses of medical care and a increased desire for products and services.

The US has the best amount of folks with a number of continual wellness problems, the data showed, and the optimum obesity rate between the nations around the world researched.

Lifetime expectancy at beginning in the US in 2020 was 77 several years – a few decades considerably less than the OECD typical – and early facts indicates that US life expectancy dropped even further more in 2021. Because the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, much more people died from coronavirus infections in the US than in any other higher-money nation, in accordance to the report.

Deaths brought on by assaults also appeared to be optimum in the US when compared with all peer international locations. The researchers identified that deaths from bodily assault, which includes gun violence, transpired at a charge of 7.4 fatalities for each 100,000 individuals in the US in 2020, considerably bigger than the OECD typical of 2.7 and at least seven periods greater than most other superior-income nations in the report.

The place the US appeared to do effectively was in most cancers avoidance and treating cancers early. Along with Sweden, it had the optimum quantity of breast cancer screenings between women ages 50 to 69, and the US exceeded the OECD normal when it arrived to screening fees for colorectal cancer.

A different paper released in mid-January claimed that the US most cancers dying level has fallen 33{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} given that 1991, which corresponds to an approximated 3.8 million fatalities averted.

Total, the new Commonwealth Fund report “continues to display the importance of global comparisons,” Reginald D. Williams II, who potential customers The Commonwealth Fund’s Global System, said in the news release. “It features an chance for the U.S. to understand from other nations and establish a much better wellbeing treatment program that provides economical, superior-excellent health and fitness care for everyone.”

A great deal of the details in the new report displays developments that have been witnessed ahead of.

“It validates the reality that we carry on to shell out much more than any one else and get the worst wellbeing results. So we’re not having the best benefit for our overall health care greenback,” stated Dr. Georges Benjamin, government director of the American Public Well being Association, who was not involved in the new report.

“The major takeaway for me is that Covid did not turn out to be the great equalizer [among nations]. It did not help our scenario at all,” Benjamin claimed. “If anything at all, it uncovered the existing holes in our overall health treatment technique.”

To support resolve the holes in the US wellbeing care technique, Benjamin referenced 3 ways the nation can just take.

“We’re nevertheless the only nation that does not have universal health care or accessibility for all of our citizens,” Benjamin said.

2nd, “we do not do as considerably primary treatment prevention as the other nations, and we nevertheless have a community overall health method, which is fractured,” he reported. “The third issue is, we below-spend as opposed to other industrialized nations in societal points. They devote their funds on furnishing upfront aid for their citizens. We expend our cash on ill care.”

Global Refurbished Medical Equipment Market Driven by Increasing Demand in Developing Countries – Business

Global Refurbished Medical Equipment Market Driven by Increasing Demand in Developing Countries – Business

Image: The global refurbished medical equipment market revenue is expected to surpass USD 29 billion by 2027 (Photo courtesy of Pexels)

Purchasing a new piece of medical equipment comes with many upfront costs. And in a constantly changing industry, medical equipment can rapidly become outdated. Refurbishment is the systematic process of making used equipment equal to or better than new. Refurbishment is rebuilding or updating used equipment with new materials, components or parts to restore their original (or better) working condition and appearance. Refurbishment typically costs about half as much as buying a new one and can bring a machine back to a new-like condition. Refurbished equipment can help to avoid high upfront costs and being forced to use something that will quickly become obsolete. Refurbished medical equipment provides flexibility and also saves money by extending their lifespan to realize maximum return on investment. As a result, the global refurbished medical equipment market is projected to grow at a CAGR of 11.76{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} from USD 15.23 billion in 2021 to USD 29.68 billion by 2027, driven by increasing demand for medical equipment in the developing countries, high capital and procurement costs of new medical equipment, and growing preference for eco-friendly products. These are the latest findings of Arizton Advisory & Intelligence (Chicago, IL, USA), a market research firm.

Nearly one-third of the medical equipment industry in the developing countries is part of the refurbished medical equipment market. The dearth of access to medical equipment in the developing countries has attracted global interest in the refurbished medical equipment market for disease diagnosis. Healthcare systems in the low-and middle-income countries often have limited access to medical equipment for routine use. Implementing medical equipment refurbishment in a developing country provides employment, increases the knowledge of medical technology among the people, and thus, provides a sustainable supply of skilled personnel for the healthcare industry.

Medical equipment typically consists of complex machines that are expensive to purchase and operate and require significant maintenance. Small & medium-sized hospitals often cannot afford to buy new high-end equipment. Smaller clinics and local medical centers may not be inclined to spend their resources on purchasing limited new equipment that can easily deplete their entire annual budget. These facilities prefer refurbished equipment of reputed brands that will cost less but perform well for a few years without complaints. Purchasing refurbished medical equipment allows healthcare providers to maximize their budget while providing quality treatment options to each patient. By investing in refurbished equipment, hospitals and clinics can free up much-needed funds for other uses, such as staff, disposables, and medicines, further contributing to the growth of the refurbished medical equipment market. Additionally, refurbished medical equipment eliminates the annoying problems faced in using a worn-down machine and avoids the learning curve associated with new equipment.

Medical equipment inventory is an accepted cost of doing business for manufacturers and is often the most significant cost category. Since medical equipment is typically a high-value product, any efficiencies or cost reductions can quickly contribute to the bottom line. Older equipment does not last forever, and this equipment eventually will need to be replaced and refurbished. Many facilities are now eager to replace their older systems with the resolution of global supply chain problems. This will contribute to the rising sales of refurbished medical devices, aided by a large inventory of used medical equipment.

Refurbished medical equipment also offers environmental benefits. By extending the useful life of medical equipment from 5-7 to 10-14 years or even more, refurbishment is a form of reuse and waste prevention, contributing to an environmental economy. Refurbishment saves energy, and the materials are used to produce new equipment. Refurbishing medical equipment and extending its service life maximizes the return on the initial investment of energy and materials. Approximately 90{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of the material for a system undergoing refurbishment can be reused; only 10{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of the material must be recycled, which is done using environmentally friendly processes. In addition to important environmental benefits, refurbishing provides sustainable economic benefits by creating business and employment in the refurbished medical equipment market. Even existing equipment owners may consider refurbishing their machines rather than disposing off old ones and buying new ones if their users are comfortable using the specific model. A refurbished asset can be re-capitalized on a depreciation schedule at half the value of new equipment.

Based on product type, the medical imaging segment dominated the refurbished medical equipment market in 2021 with the highest share of 25.58{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f}. The use of medical diagnostic imaging equipment can resolve between 70-80{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of diagnostic problems, but nearly 2/3 of the world’s population has no access to diagnostic radiology. Refurbished X-ray machines, ultrasound systems, MRI machines, CT scanners, and nuclear medicine systems (PET, SPECT, and PET/CT) allow healthcare facilities to provide patients with life-saving medical diagnostic imaging services. The medical imaging equipment segment is expected to record the highest incremental growth of USD 3.10 billion, while the IVD & laboratories equipment segment is expected to register the highest CAGR of 13.14{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} over the forecast period.

Based on application, the diagnosis & monitoring segment dominated the refurbished medical equipment market in 2021 with a share of 69.46{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f}, followed by the treatment & surgical interventions segment. Medical equipment is extensively utilized for patients’ diagnosis and treatment. Diagnostic and monitoring applications comprise Cardiology, Urology, Neurology, Orthopedics, Physiology, Emergency Medicine, Oncology, Obstetrics/Gynecology (OB/GYN), and others. The diagnosis & monitoring segment is expected to register the highest incremental growth of USD 9.73 billion, while the treatment & surgical interventions segment is expected to register the highest CAGR of 12.40{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} over the forecast period.

Based on end-user, the hospital segment dominated the refurbished medical equipment market in 2021 with the largest share of 37.97{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f}. Hospitals utilize more medical equipment than any other healthcare setting. Diagnostics are the primary screening method in hospitals, which are the first point of contact for any infection and disease. The rising number of people with various infectious diseases compels physicians in hospitals to use diagnostic imaging equipment, thereby increasing their demand. The hospital segment is expected to register the highest incremental growth of USD 5.24 billion, while the clinical & research laboratories segment is expected to record the highest CAGR of 12.18{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} over the forecast period.

Geographically, North America and Europe are the matured markets for refurbished medical equipment. In 2021, North America dominated the global refurbished medical equipment market with a share of 28.24{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} and revenues of USD 4.30 billion, due to its aging population, prevalence of chronic diseases, growing healthcare expenditure, need for advanced imaging techniques, presence of well-established players, and a significant shift towards digital medical equipment in the region. Further, the US accounted for a share of 91.21{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} of the North American refurbished medical equipment market, led by an increasing diseased population, growing access to insurance, and faster adoption of advanced healthcare instruments for treatments in the country. Following North America, the refurbished medical equipment market was dominated by Europe, APAC, Latin America, and the Middle East & Africa. The APAC market for refurbished medical equipment is expected to register the highest CAGR of 14.45{bf0515afdcaddba073662ceb89fbb62b6b1bf123143c0e06b788e1946e8c353f} and the highest incremental growth of USD 4.84 billion over the forecast period, driven by constant public and private funding, advancements in diagnostic imaging models, and growing medical awareness.

Related Links:

Arizton Advisory & Intelligence 

Opinion | Expensive U.S. health care enables low prices in other countries

Comment

David Goldhill is the chief executive of SesameCare.com, a digital marketplace for discounted health services.

The United States spends twice as much per person as other wealthy countries on health care. This fact is well-known, and when it is mentioned, people often point out that the governments of other developed countries leverage purchasing power to drive cheaper, more universal care. So why doesn’t the United States do the same thing?

Because we can’t. In fact, the do-what-everyone-else-does option is uniquely unavailable to us.

The world’s other health-care systems survive only because they receive a massive and ongoing, but hidden, subsidy courtesy of the inefficient U.S. system. Two unique features of our arrangement — the absence of price controls and the profit drive of doctors and hospitals — allow other countries to transfer the risk and cost of medical innovation to Americans.

And unlike in any other industry, once Americans have borne the costs of lifesaving breakthroughs as well as incremental improvements in tools and techniques, these can be used elsewhere at little extra cost. American exorbitance allows other nations to offer price-controlled universal care with none of the decline in quality, technology or productivity that would otherwise result from central planning.

A similar complaint has been made about the country’s defense alliance: U.S. allies ride free on American defense spending. Health care, indeed, is a kind of second NATO.

The United States can’t lower its costs by doing what other countries do, because what others do depends on our unique system remaining as is. Our only hope is to put in place more sensible economic structures that could introduce the competition that’s necessary to bring prices down.

The size of the U.S. health-care system is almost impossible to overstate. With barely four percent of the world’s population, the United States accounts for almost half of the world’s $8 trillion health-care economy. England’s National Health Service is tiny by comparison — barely bigger than U.S. Veterans Affairs health system funding. Canada’s total spending is comparable to the revenue of a single American company, United Health. Free-market star Singapore spends only as much as New Jersey’s Medicaid program.


Opinion | Expensive U.S. health care enables low prices in other countries

The world’s top 10 spenders in pharmaceutical products

In 2020, the United States spent more on pharmaceutical products than all other nine spenders in the ranking combined.

All other top 9

countries combined

Notes: Prices are reported at the ex-manufacturer level (price when sold from manufacturer to wholesaler or direct to pharmacies). * Hospital market only. **Pharmacy market only.

The world’s top 10 spenders in pharmaceutical products

In 2020, the United States spent more on pharmaceutical products than all other nine spenders in the ranking combined.

All other top 9 countries combined

Notes: Prices are reported at the ex-manufacturer level (price when sold from manufacturer to wholesaler or direct to pharmacies). * Hospital market only. **Pharmacy market only.

The world’s top 10 spenders in pharmaceutical products

In 2020, the United States spent more on pharmaceutical products than all other nine spenders in the ranking combined.

All other top 9 countries combined

Notes: Prices are reported at the ex-manufacturer level (price when sold from manufacturer to wholesaler or direct to pharmacies). * Hospital market only. **Pharmacy market only.

This is why all health-care innovators — makers of drugs, devices, diagnostics, medical software — share the same business plan: Make money in the United States and take whatever scraps you can get in the other markets.

The pharmaceutical industry earns almost 50 percent of its worldwide revenue here, as do medical information-technology firms. Device makers earn 40 percent of their money in the United States. And this understates things, because U.S. revenue is generated from higher prices, so margins are greater. If the United States accounts for half of a company’s revenue, it probably contributes at least 75 percent of its profits.

America’s domination might not seem obvious. After all, high-tech health care exists everywhere in the world. Even in emerging economies, brilliant researchers, great universities and advanced companies perform cutting-edge research. Many have close relationships with their countries’ health-care systems, and some innovations are introduced in other nations. But the profit opportunity — the reason to invest — is always generated in the United States.

Consider the well-known miracle drug Gleevec. Before it came along in 2001, less than 30 percent of patients diagnosed with chronic myelogenous leukemia survived at least five years; today, 90 percent do.

Gleevec is also a poster drug for American dysfunction. Novartis steadily raised its price in the United States — even after its patent expired — to eventually reaching more than $123,000 per year in 2020. Yet, in Canada, Gleevec was priced at $38,000. A generic version in India now costs just $400.

Drugmakers and their opponents argue over the “fair” returns on innovation that companies need to maintain their incentive to invest in new medicines. Critics point to the share of pharma’s profits that come from barely legal anticompetitive behavior or from drugs created with heavy public support — such as the U.S. government’s $12 billion investment in coronavirus vaccines.

But enormous returns on a few blockbuster drugs compensate for drugmakers’ many unsuccessful products. That’s the business model, and these big, “unfair” returns are available only in the United States.

If the world’s largest health economy limited drug companies to “fair” returns — as other countries try to — then few new drugs would be created. The United States doesn’t pay $123,000 a year for Gleevec despite Canada paying only $38,000; Canada can pay $38,000 only because the United States pays $140,000.

And while pharmaceuticals might be the most obvious area in which the U.S. economy drives innovation, the $3.5 trillion we spend on care other than drugs makes an even greater contribution to world health-care advances.

In 2000, Intuitive Surgical Systems introduced the first commercially successful robotic surgery system. The company’s da Vinci robots carry $2 million price tags plus costly service contracts. In the first 20 years, 6,000 of the robots were sold worldwide, and American hospitals purchased roughly two-thirds of them.

Why? In the United States, the prices charged by hospitals and doctors are unrestricted. American physicians earn roughly two to three times as much as their counterparts in western Europe. Hospitals charge two to five times as much for their services.

The obvious, if rarely asked, question is: Why doesn’t competition bring U.S. health-care prices down? The answer: America’s stagnant third-party payment system allows hospitals and doctors to avoid competing on price. Instead, they compete on innovation. This is why hospitals advertise advanced, high-tech cancer therapies; surgeons build reputations for cutting-edge procedures; and even your family physician must invest to keep up.

Right now, we’re stuck. We want what every other country has. American reformers believe we’re just one clever policy tweak away from getting it — perhaps by instituting accountable care or “value-based” care.

But the only way to lower U.S. health-care costs is to rethink the system’s top-down policy structures that rely on huge, centralized payers.

What’s needed is a way to separate the safety net function that insurance provides from consumer decision-making. If insurance covered only major and unanticipated health problems, a consumer economy could drive competition in the rest of the system. This would give doctors and hospitals an economic incentive to bundle services, enhance efficiency, reduce waste and offer genuinely “value-driven” care.

In this century, the world has seen the democratization of many services considered “too complicated” for consumers — computers, finance, international travel, furniture construction, you name it. All this happened because people had enough control over their own spending to drive competition among innovators. It’s how industry managed to put supercomputer power in everyone’s pocket, while reducing price by 99 percent.

Until the same kind of competition is introduced in health care, the U.S. system will continue to subsidize the world — and cost us a fortune.