The provision of quality and affordable health care is often dependent on numerous factors, one primary factor being the expenditure directed into health care. Research identifies a positive correlation between health outcomes and spending and some of the most recognizable countries applying the methodology effectively include Japan as the leader, Switzerland, and Singapore. However, the methodology cannot be perfectly executed as other factors will affect these health outcomes including sanitation, diet and much more. As it stands, the use of health outcomes in a cost-effective methodology has many benefits for the nations that resort to its use while it will also present challenges that may affect health outcomes negatively resulting in low life expectancy, increased mortality and high rates of ill health.
The relationship between health outcomes and health expenditure is complicated because spending on healthcare is one of the many factors that contribute to quality health care. However, previous studies have identified how health expenditure will result in quality health care for the region in which the methodology is applied. Health expenditure on health outcomes has demonstrated an increase in life expectancies for both men and women to the tune or more than six months for men and three months for women. In such a case, health expenditure is dependent on individual/household and federal spending on various healthcare outcomes (Frag et al., 2013). Spending on healthcare means that, the health sector can access the best quality medication, facilities, and equipment and this makes it easier to deliver quality healthcare. Countries provide the best healthcare education and services to its citizens when the right resources are put in place which is often possible when funds are enough and readily available for such endeavors. As research indicates, countries that invest in health expenditure rank highly in life expectancy levels of their citizens. The United States is however identified as an outlier in some statistics on expenditure and health outcomes as it spends significantly on its health outcomes, in some instances, more than the many leading nations in this factor (Frag et al., 2013).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Nonetheless, its life expectancy lags behind many of these countries. However, it is evident that the more a nation’s health expenditure is, the more its citizens access quality and long lives. Therefore health care expenditure on health care outcomes stands as a benefit for those who adopt.
Further, a nation’s healthcare system and one that is deemed successful is identified by the quality of life of its children. Children are a unique population which needs specialized and detailed healthcare compared to adults as their health and immunity is more demanding compared to that of adults. It means that a nation that is not as keen on health care for children will experience an increase in the deaths of its children especially at birth or during infancy. Research, however, shows that a nation that invests sufficiently in its health outcomes will experience infant mortality rates that are lower by 0.5% than those nations that do not spend on healthcare (Frag et al., 2013). It means that a government that invests in the health care sector makes a significant investment in the well-being of its younger generation. Just like health expenditure through improved technology, medication, facilities, and services increase life expectancy in adults, it is also useful in decreasing infant mortality rates for the children. Such is indicative as another significant benefit of health expenditure and health outcomes.
As it stands, health outcomes are highly dependent on health expenditure as developed by various nations. It is an indication that health expenditure acts as one of the primary reasons while the overall health of a country will flourish. Health expenditure provides the opportunity for better health care technology, better medical personnel, facilities, and services. However, some scholars believe that health expenditure presents more of a cost than a benefit for any nation that resorts to its implementation. It means that even as health expenditure and outcomes present an avenue for better health care, they are also indicative of an ailing nation. It is, therefore, necessary to explore the costs that come with health care spending and outcomes.
Health care expenditure may often make no difference for health outcomes. Existing evidence indicates that nations that spend on their health care do not witness any changes in their health care outcomes. A significant example is the United States which still lags in health outcomes despite depicting the highest health expenditure (Kim & Lane, 2013). The situation has remained the same for the United States for the past many years, but its health care outcomes remain in the bottom half of effective healthcare systems and its positions have been on a decline from the 1960s. The region has areas with high levels of health expenditure, but the evidence does not identify a significant difference in patient satisfaction or care for patients in these high spending regions. It means that health care expenditure presents a burden to the taxpayers as it does not yield the necessary results (Kim & Lane, 2013). Such spending could be viewed as a waste of resources since it does not produce the expected results. It, therefore, stands as a cost than a benefit for those it serves. Further, health care expenditure and health outcomes will vary across regions, and the different strategies applied by these regions may turn it into a cost.
Health spending and health outcomes vary between developed and less developed countries. In many instances, less developed countries experience limited advancement in many of their sectors and infrastructure (Kim & Lane, 2013). For example, a less developed country will develop a health spending policy or strategy without considering the overall state of other sectors in the region. Such a nation will implement the health spending strategy, but because critical infrastructure such as health facilities and roads are not well developed, a health spending endeavor will be ineffective. It means that such strategies will be enacted, but they may not reach their target population making health care worse for its citizens. It also means that the lack of appropriate infrastructure makes it difficult for patients to access health care services meaning that health care spending would be ineffective and to a certain extent, a waste of resources.
Nonetheless, health care spending and health outcomes vary significantly across regions including the delivery an implementation. Further, health spending will incorporate other factors to help achieve the required health outcomes. It means that contention between the benefits and costs of the methodology with continually exist as different regions experience it differently. As it stands, the debate on health spending and health outcomes will continue as different scholars work on identifying whether it is a beneficial or costly endeavor for patients. It, however, remains that health spending has immense benefits for a given population and it may have none as determined by different factors.
References
Farag, M., Nandakumar, A. K., Wallack, S., Hodgkin, D., Gaumer, G., & Erbil, C. (2013). Health expenditures, health outcomes and the role of good governance. International journal of health care finance and economics , 13 (1), 33-52.
Kim, T. K., & Lane, S. R. (2013). Government health expenditure and public health outcomes: a comparative study among 17 countries and implications for US health care reform. American International Journal of Contemporary Research , 3 (9), 8-13.
