U.S. is No. 1 in a key area of healthcare. Guess which one ...

Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Britain — all are outperforming the United States when it comes to most aspects of healthcare. Again. But we're still tops in one area: spending.

Take that, Netherlands.

The assessment is from a new Commonwealth Fund report, released Wednesday, ranking healthcare systems on quality, access, efficiency, equity and healthy lives.

After pointing out that the other countries have universal health coverage (perhaps you'd heard?) and that the access picture should change as the health overhaul is implemented, the summary of the report states:

"But even when access and equity measures are not considered, the U.S. ranks behind most of the other countries on most measures. ... It is apparent that the U.S. is lagging in adoption of national policies that promote primary care, quality improvement, and information technology."

The report notes that various legislative remedies (read: funds) are now being administered to mitigate these symptoms as well.

But money doesn't necessarily buy quality, as the assessment emphasizes, and it would appear we have a long way to go in improving key elements of our healthcare system.

Here's today's L.A. Times article on healthcare: Obama proposes interim health protections ... "The regulations, all outlined in the healthcare overhaul bill, include barring insurance plans from denying coverage to children with preexisting conditions. Republicans call the rules a sales job."

— Tami Dennis

Photo: A patient undergoes robotic surgery in Florida. Credit: Roberto Gonzalez / Orlando Sentinel

 

Become a fan of our Facebook page and get a steady stream of health-and medical-related news, musings and the occasional oddity.

Comments

[James X]

I think they are confusing health care system (as in insurance) with health care technology (as in surgery techniques, research and development). It is a easy mistake. Rarely do anyone claim that the right-wing nuts are thinkers.

[San Diegan]

I was an expatriate working at a cardiology ward in Taiwan during 2006-08... it's one of the most capitalistic countries in the world... everyone and their grandmother have a thriving small business. And it has national health insurance where you can go straight to the specialist, get treated, and there's NO paperwork!

The so-called capitalism in the U.S. is really "corporate capitalism"... only the mega-corps have the right to freely crush small businesses. Corporate health insurance companies and their flunkie$ in the Republican Party (and few in the Democratic Party) tell us lies and spread fear on their corporate-owned network TV. If only We the People would a little humble and a little diligent and figure out what's really going outside of our borders, instead of parroting the fear-mongers on TV. "Death panels"?! "Unplugging grandma"?? C'mon! People in Asia, Oceania, Europe, most of Africa, and most of Latin America are laughing at us.

[EmCee]

Just because we don't do it well or right, doesn't mean we don't offer the best, which is indeed a fact for most major, treatable, common procedures like heart surgery, organ transplants, cancer treatment, etc. If you're looking for esoteric, unproven, end-of-life, last ditch effort medicine, go to almost any other country, including our Mexican neighbors south. They'll be happy to inject you with an empty promise for the cash in your pocket. The U.S. is the best in clinical treatments. We fail miserably in adopting best practices, collaboration and use of proven information tech that would save lives (like using simple electronic prescription fulfillment). Obama hasn't changed any of that. Look no further than our child mortality rates, your baby has better chance of survival in Iceland, Japan or Australia. So what do we know.

[D Rant]

Utter nonsense.

[Gary Weiss]

Of Coarse!!
Spending for American health care must support the Interloping Professional Criminal Class of The Insurance Industry and Lawyer Lotto Scheme!

[GermanDoc]

The U.S. is ridiculous, far too expensive, greedy and of moderate quality. The result of the report reflects abolutely my personal experience. I moved from Germany 5 years ago to the U.S. and I can only state that all the GOP socialistic fantasies about European healthcare systems are wishful thinking. You have immediate access to every specialist in Germany with half the costs, and this for everyone. Physicians here are greedy, do constantly repeated unneccessary investigations purely on greed. There are specialized centers in the U.S. which do fancy procedures on high quality, but for most people unaffordable. But 99% of the people here get poor to moderate service, when they have access to it at all. Most shocking is that so many people here have to stop cancer treatment because they can't afford it. In Germany nobody has to prey to get not sick and nobody has to fear to go bancrupt due to illness.

[rh]

I am an American living in the UK. It is interesting to live in a country that pays 17.5% VAT (soon to be 20%) on just about everything they buy. This does not include the fact Brits may pay up to 40% income tax.

There are problems with health care here. One of the issues is know as the "post code lottery" by which a person's post code largely determines the amount spent on medical facilities and the availability of treatment. We know someone who needed hernia surgery -- while it's a fairly easy surgery to have completed in the US, it took over 6 months to get an appointment.

I've seen other cases where a self-employed person could not get required brain surgery to fix a problem that developed that made them unable to work, take care of their family, keep their home, etc. Their friends and family raised the 80k+ Pounds (roughly $120k) to have a private facility complete the procedures, after which the man was able to fully function again.

Don't get me wrong, the US system has issues and there are various approaches to fixing it. However, the NHS here in the UK leaves something to be desired too. I'm not convinced Obama or the Republicans totally have the right answer...although there should be some program in place to provide basic coverage to those who work full time. I'm definitely not thrilled at the prospect of paying another 10% (or more) in taxes to pay for nationalized health care.

[xperia]

I agree with Michelle and James X (health care technology vs health care administration). Adpac: your friends and relatives from other countries are able to come to US for healthcare is because their insurances cover them no matter where they are! and they do a damn good job! If they belong to middle class, it is very foolish of them to come to US for health care when these countries have both the quality of technology and better administration. We may have cutting edge healthcare technologies but what good is it when most citizens cannot afford or get treated properly. Read about medical tourism and you'll find US is not a popular destination for medical treatment.

I bet half the people talking about the greatness of the American system have not even left the US (excluding Canada) let alone for living at least visiting a foreign country. They really have no first hand experience of other healthcare administrative system: like the Taiwanese, Japanese, the Swiss and the German. These guys have both the technology and proper administration, unlike us lacking in the latter department. (I lived in France, Switzerland and Germany for about 2 years each and I have first hand experience)

These insurance companies are making profits from your health. Does this sound ethical to you? The whole concept of competition for insurance companies is failing; because of profit motive. Can we have competition for the defense as well? Those who feel they need minimum or no coverage against foreign attacks can pay minimum while those who fear the most can pay the whole amount. And not to forget education as well: my kid gets straight As in school versus your kid who barely passes so he/she doesn't deserve good education. Does this sound fair to you?

Moral of the story: statistics can always be manipulated. Flag waving and jingoism is not going to solve our problems. We have given the insurance companies a chance to prove themselves, they have proven themselves unsatisfactory. Now can we give the government a chance? Lets be fair. The government is not a separate entity but they actually represent us: the people!

[Mitchell]

We cannot afford $600-$700/month for health insurance premiums AND pay co-payments and deductibles.
We have been uninsured (health) for more than a decade.
The United States is so far behind in health care. When we lived in Mexico for two years, we found the health care to be much better.
Our healthcare plan for now is, become ill, pray we have enough time for a flight to Mexico or Thailand.
One thing that is undeniable but no one wants to talk about is how we each have a personal responsibility to our own health. Drugs are not the answer and neither is elective surgery. Diet and exercise can solve 75% or more of most ailments. No doctor can make you eat well or exercise regularly. That is a personal responsibility.
Every time I travel, I look around the airports and see how disgusting people treat their own bodies. It is a shame.
This health care problem is decades old and cannot be simply blamed on one political party or president.
Sorry bobble-heads. The truth is that all the ignoring and delays in finding a valid solution are finally catching up with our country, and french fries and fast food are not part of the solution.

[Stephen Real]

What do you expect from the a European study?
Pro-American results for American doctors and American hospitals?
Come on man!?
It's almost farse in many ways.

[Evelyn]

Americans across the country are already seeing the effect of the health care bill. But........ Do you feel the changes in the health care payment system will be better for America? what does the new health care bill mean for middle class Americans?
share your opinion at http://alotofdrugs.blogspot.com/2010/06/obama-plan.html

[Mark Favis]

"Researchers acknowledged that any relative comparison of healthcare systems has inherent limitations. They noted that the study was based on national mortality data and the perceptions and experiences of patients and physicians."

In other words, it's OPINION based on their CHERRY PICKED data and not FACT, based on any proof or real science.

How in the hell can you measure the quality of healthcare by mortality numbers alone or an opinion of some random patient?? I can see why Europeans need to conduct studies like this, since theirs are so horrible, broke, under funded, and inefficient. You really think these countries do the research and have the innovation that we do? Are they spending the money to bring these life-saving medical inventions to market? They leech off of what we create and cherry-pick the best ones that work for their own lousy budgets. Their systems are billions in debt and they are still lagging. Explain to me how this is a good thing. We don't lag because we spend more money per patient, but because we pay the real costs while other countries RATION a lot more than we do, WITHOUT the best drugs and medical technology.

What does quality heatlh care have to do with murder, homicides, suicide, accidents, abortion or deaths caused in war?? They don't even measure abortion like we do, since they don't have the capacity or technology to save preemies or underweight children at birth. In Europe these kinds of births are written off as nothing and are not counted as a real birth. Here THEY ARE! Did you know these count into the 'mortality statistics?' Who conducted the study and what SOCIALIST criteria was involved?? Get back to me when you find out.

This is the same as the previous UN studies. They mean nothing and they say nothing. When you compare apples to apples in any of these countries, they are light years behind us.

[Mark Favis]

Did you notice that this report is from The Commonwealth Fund, one of the biggest proponents of Obamacare?

“The Fund is currently led by president Karen Davis… She served as deputy assistant secretary for health policy in the Department of Health and Human Services from 1977–1980, under the Carter administration…”

Cartercare -> Hillarycare -> Obamacare

What a joke. Thanks (once again) for the far-left laughs, LA High-Crimes.

[DavidAdner]

and the USA is also number 1 in Obesity rates

[youfail]

thebob.bob - no, they're just the ones logical enough to realize we're broke. yes please have fun paying for everyone elses medical care with your taxes.

[KH]

John: I live in Minneapolis and have several family members who are nurses. None of them make figures near 80k. There are "health practitioners" who make that much money, but they are not part of the union - or the strike - and generally have masters or doctorates. They are the extreme minority. The vast majority of nurses are scheduled full time, but in reality work part time hours (30 hours of work - 10 additional on call), which makes getting a second part time job difficult if not impossible.

I am not saying that nurses are not paid - and paid well - for the hours they do work. However, the impression many people have thanks to much of the media and hospitals' propaganda heavily distorts the work environment and annual income nurses receive.

[Peter]

Yet ANOTHER example of journalistic malpractice/laziness.

How about at least ONE mention of exactly who the people are who wrote this "report"?

Do you think that it might be relevant that The Commonwealth Fund is a left-wing advocacy group?

This is what "journalism" has become - the simple regurgitation of press releases.

What utter crap.

[Regina]

Hi John - Just a little feedback about your pointing to nurses as the cause of the high cost of healthcare. Nurses have at the minimum masters degrees. If they are specialists (cardiac, orthopedic, oncology, etc.), they have additional education and degrees. Nurses are highly trained professionals (more educated than engineers, whom you cite as a comparison). Nurses typically work twelve hour shifts, sometimes 5 days a week. And the low "nurse to patient" ratio that you think is unreasonable, well, wait until you are one of seven patients in the ICU that ONE nurse has to care for during her/his shift. The high "patient to nurse" ratio endangers the health of the patient and reduces the quality of the care they receive. The job is so stressful, both emotionally and physically, that nurses typically must retire before they are fifty years old. You might consider these factors when you decide that the reason there aren't enough nurses is that no new nurses can find jobs (that not the case in California, anyway). The truth is that nursing as a career isn't attracting new graduates due to the cost of the education and the job stress. If you think $35K is adequate compensation for nursing in a critical care situation, all I can say is "you get what you pay for", and good luck to you.

[Root Hoi]

You're forgetting also #1 in medical response times and time to see a doctor.