Healthcare Outcomes Canada vs. USA

Canada spent US$3,678 per person on health care in 2006, whereas the US spent US$6,714 per person. In that year, the United States spent 15.3% of its GDP on healthcare, while Canada spent 10%. In 2006, the government funded 70% of healthcare spending in Canada while it only funded 46% of healthcare spending in the US. The U.S. government spent 23% more per person on healthcare overall than the Canadian government did. The amount that the US government spent on healthcare was slightly less than 83% of all Canadian spending (public and private).

Regarding the outcome

of this difference in spending, studies have reached varying findings. Compared to the US, Canada has a lower newborn mortality rate and a longer life expectancy, among other notable differences.

In a widely-used comparison, the US was ranked 37th and Canada 30th out of 191 member countries in the World Health Organization's 2000 ratings of "overall health service performance," which used a "composite measure of achievement in the level of health, the distribution of health, the level of responsiveness and fairness of financial contribution." The US was ranked first in this study's "responsiveness" category, which measures the quality of care provided to patients, while Canada came in seventh. Nonetheless, Canadians had an average life expectancy of 80.34 years, while Americans had an average life expectancy of 78.6 years.

Certain evaluations have challenged the study techniques used by the WHO. Although life expectancy and infant mortality are frequently used to compare health care across the country, they are actually influenced by a wide range of factors, including population composition and individual behavior, in addition to the caliber of a country's health care system. A 2007 Congressional Research Service paper highlights the "difficult research issues" surrounding international comparisons and provides a thorough summary of some recent data.

involvement of the government

In 2004, $1,893 per person was the amount that the Canadian government funded healthcare. The US government spent $2,728 on each person.[14]

The Canadian healthcare system is made up of a federal system that serves First Nations and the armed forces, as well as at least ten primarily independent provincial healthcare systems that answer to their respective province governments. This leads to a notable degree of diversity in the nation's funding and coverage.[Reference required]

Past Events

Early 1960s healthcare systems in the US and Canada were comparable, but current funding sources diverge. About 70% of costs are covered by Canada's universal single-payer healthcare system, and the Canada Health Act mandates that all insured individuals receive full insurance coverage for all medically necessary hospital and physician services, free of co-payments or user fees.[Reference required] The public sector pays for almost 91% of hospital expenses and 99% of all medical services. With a combined public-private insurance system, 16% of Americans, or 45 million people, lack insurance at any given moment.[16] The United States and Turkey are the only two OECD nations without universal health care. By November 2008, Mexico had implemented a national healthcare policy.

Medicare, Medicaid, and the State

Both countries' governments have a strong hand in the medical field. Health insurance is the main structural distinction between the two. As long as the province in question complies with the accessibility guarantees outlined in the Canada Health Act—which expressly forbids billing end users for procedures that are covered by Medicare—the federal government of Canada is dedicated to supporting its provincial governments financially for healthcare expenditures.[Reference required] Health economists do not refer to Canada's system as "socialized medicine," despite the fact that some have done so. The Canadian system offers public coverage for a mix of public and private delivery, in contrast to systems that have public delivery, like the UK system. According to Uwe E. Reinhardt, a health economist at Princeton University, single-payer systems are more like "social insurance" than "socialized medicine" because most providers, such doctors, are in the private sector.[18] In a similar vein, private boards or regional health authorities oversee hospitals in Canada as opposed to the government.

Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which provide coverage to qualifying elderly, low-income individuals, people with disabilities, and children, are the only US government programs that directly pay healthcare. The soldiers Health Administration, which is managed by the federal government, operates clinics and medical centers and offers direct medical care to retired or handicapped soldiers, their families, and survivors.

The Military Health System is also administered by the US government. With a $39.4 billion budget in total for the 2007 fiscal year, the MHS provided services to about 9.1 million beneficiaries, including retirees and their families as well as active-duty troops and their families. 133,000 people work for the MHS—86,000 of whom are military and 47,000 of whom are civilians—at more than 1,000 sites across the globe, including 1,085 clinics for medicine, dentistry, and veterans' care and 70 inpatient hospitals.

According to one survey, over 25% of Americans without health insurance are qualified for these programs but do not enroll; still, providing coverage to everyone who qualifies still presents a financial and political barrier.