Introduction
The effectiveness of a healthcare system is achieved through a concrete
adherence to affordability among the targeted audience who are the citizens of
a given country. However, the issue of affordability has been the main story
within the health industry of the United States. The American government has
been at the peak of ensuring that the cost of health becomes affordable to the
American population regardless of both the economic and social classes. Here,
many stories have always been formulated at different levels with more parties
portraying their understanding of the given issues within the American
healthcare system. Philosophical arguments have also been promoted in ensuring
appreciable understanding of the subject matter (Reinhardt, 2009). In this
case, the analysis achieves a concrete response to the various philosophical
arguments behind the given topic. Relevant articles are explored to
ascertain the credibility of the achieved arguments within texts in comparison
to the actual understanding of the American health system.
Article Summary
The article “Cost-effectiveness analysis'
and US healthcare†by Reinhardt (2009) achieves its content by exploring
various arguments concerning comparative effective analysis and cost-effective
analysis as far as the healthcare system of the United States is concerned. It
focuses on elaborating the different arguments about the cost of the American
healthcare system as far as the established economic stimulus bill is
concerned. It elaborates about the different perspectives achieved by different
parties concerning the cost-effectiveness of the American health system as
brought about by the proposed amount by the stimulus bill. Reinhardt emphasizes
the need to have a clear understanding of the cost position of the health
system of the United States (Reinhardt, 2009).
The author acknowledged that indeed the
different perceptions on the cost-effectiveness of the American healthcare
system are based on various reasons that only focus on a single direction of
argumentation. In fact, according to the Reinhardt (2009), the vehement
concerns achieved from the numerous reactions in the cost of healthcare within
the United States is based on the proposed ten billion dollars in handling
comparative effectiveness analysis (Reinhardt, 2009). However, as achieved
by the author, the irrelevant reactions should not be based on the engaged cost
but the purpose that the proposed amount is going to handle. In that essence,
the article explains on the importance of the achieved cost of promoting a
comparative effective analysis by handling the different views concerning the
influence that the bill would have on the integrity of the effectiveness of the
cost of healthcare system within the United States.
Comparison of Strength and Weaknesses
within the Article
The nature of the achieved approaches
within the article can be viewed at different angles as far as their
effectiveness in promoting a promising healthcare system is concerned. The
article has proposed different approaches to illustrating the healthcare system
of the United States. The main approach that has been achieved by the author of
the article is based on the importance of the promoted Stimulus Bill in
handling the effectiveness of the medical approaches within the United States.
The article has reasoned on the importance of the bill as opposed to the
engaged suggestions on the influence of the bill on the effectiveness of the
healthcare cost within the country (Reinhardt, 2009). Ideologically, the
achieved bill can be viewed in two directions.
The author’s approach to the importance of
the bill valid based on the impact that the bill would have on the
effectiveness of the medical decisions as would be achieved by the American
health care professionals. The comparative effective analysis engaged in the
stimulus bill is aimed at ensuring that the promoted healthcare attempts
achieve zero error and promote effectiveness at all levels (Reinhardt,
2009). In this essence, given the intention of the established bill and the
attached cost of ensuring the implementation and the success of the bill, it is
relevant to argue on view of the author’s approach.
Comparatively, even though the achieved
approach to the economic stimulus bill would positively impact the quality of
the healthcare initiatives within the United States, it is evident that such
attempts would appreciate the cost of handling healthcare matters within the
country (Reinhardt, 2009). Of course, one of the major initiatives of the
health management system within the United States is to increase the level of healthcare
service with a reduced cost of such engaged healthcare services for the
American populations. In this essence, the weakness of the proposed healthcare
approach within the article in handling quality healthcare is based on the
increased cost of healthcare delivery attached to the initiative.
Assessment of Healthcare Cost-Benefit
Analysis and Cost-Effective Analysis
The cost-effective and cost-benefit
analysis are the best approaches that can be utilized in evaluating the engaged
cost and the relevant outcome of a given cost to an established project. The
cost-benefit analysis focuses on the establishment of the appreciable
decision-making process. It emphasizes the relevance of understanding the
relationship between an engaged action and its attached cost. In that, the
engagement of valuable decisions is achieved based on the manner in which the
attached cost relate to the promoted situation or activity. On the other hand,
the cost-effective analysis is normally done in response to the importance that
an attached cost on a given activity would render to the outcome of the
activity. In this essence as far as the application of both the cost-benefit
analysis and cost-effective analysis is concerned, it is acknowledging that the
two can be perfectly utilized in promoting a concrete understanding of cost and
quality decisions in handling healthcare decisions (Udvarhelyi, Colditz,
Rai, & Epstein, 1992).
The cost-effective analysis can be used in
ensuring appreciable understanding of the best decision that can be factored in
handling an engagement of a given cost to the on a healthcare initiative. As
far as the issues of cost-effective implementation of healthcare decisions
within the United States is concerned, the application of the cost-effective
analysis would be used in handling such factors within the healthcare
industry (Udvarhelyi, Colditz, Rai, & Epstein, 1992). Relevantly, a
combination of the cost-effective and cost-benefit analysis can ensure a
credible outcome in the establishment of a comprehensive decision in the
engagement of both quality and the attached costs. Here, the achieved decision
can be influenced based on the impact that the engaged cost would have on the
outcome of the implemented issue within the health leadership
Conclusion
The health position of the United States
has been having some irregularities associated with the cost-effectiveness and
the establishment of quality healthcare approaches. Different ideologies have
been factored into ensuring an appreciable decision that would promote a
positive result in the implementation of cost-effective strategies. The major
issue, here, has been based on the manner in which the engaged costs of
increasing the healthcare service would result in a lower cost of achieving the
healthcare services. Of course, the engagement of healthcare attempts is
normally associated with economic values. In that, the economy of a given
nation is built on a healthy society (Reinhardt, 2009). For that matter,
it is the ultimate responsibility of the government of any nation to promote
appreciable decision that would ensure a healthy society. The government should
ensure a health free initiative as a strategy for promoting a better economic
growth.
However, this has not been the case within
the United States, the government has been imposing legal policies that call
for an affordable healthcare with minimal concern to the appreciable
decision-making process, particularly, an inclusive decision making the
initiative. In this essence as far as the witnessed irregularities in the
management of the affordability of the healthcare services within the United
States is concerned, it is encouraging that philosophical assumption to be
given a chance in understanding the best way on the issue. The proposed
philosophical assumption, for that matter, is the encouragement of both the
cost-effective and cost-benefit analysis in encouraging concrete decision on
the relationship between the healthcare cost and the need to invest on quality
and error-free healthcare approaches (Udvarhelyi, Colditz, Rai, &
Epstein, 1992).
Additional articles
Faith and Grief The loss of my grandfather greatly affected me spiritually and emotionally. He was a man I looked up to because he was the only father figure that I had known. We were very close, and when he died, I felt that he went...Coping-with-Grief:-Navigating-the-Intersection-of-Faith-and-Reason-in-the-Face-of-Loss …
Read ArticleParenting is not a simple task, as I’ve come to learn over the years. Whereas most of us parents focus on the physical and emotional elements of development in our children, we tend to forget that we also have to develop and promote their intell...Parenting-Factors …
Read ArticleA nuclear reactor meltdown refers to a severe accident that is related to nuclear reactors, and which results in a lot of damages from overheating. Maina defines it as an accidental melting of a nuclear reactors’ core, and it can be either a ...-Nuclear-reactor-meltdowns- …
Read Article