Population health is an important concept of describing the health outcomes of a group of people in each area of locality (Improving Population Health, n.d.). The concept is equally significant in assessing the Canadian health outcomes within different communities, and subgroups of individuals. There are many factors that can affect equal distribution of health within subgroups. These factors could simply mean race, ethnicity, gender, religious background, language barriers, income inequality, et cetera. Although, United States and Canada share certain commonalities when it comes to social and environmental amenities, there are potentially vital changes in the stages of public and financial parts of population health disparity.
Healthcare system in Canada is one of the most existing political and economic crossways of its century. Canadian healthcare system is one in which private sector provides health care services to the citizens, while public sector finances those services. By using government to finance the system, it is less likely that financial inequality will play discriminate role rather help in combating population health inequality. The U.S. healthcare industry has been a market fail for a long period of century. This is because our healthcare industry, as a whole, is not effectively controlled and designed to avoid market failure. The costs of healthcare expenditures are at peak. Additionally, the use of suitable guidelines by the government can ease the tension of U.S. healthcare costs. Furthermore, it will comfort the burden of citizens, not have to exceed their out-of-pocket incidentals, just to stay healthy or get treated for high-risk diseases.
Regarding cultural miscellany and healthcare disparity, access to health care services in the U.S. is regarded as undependable. Many people do not receive the appropriate and timely care they need, and most of these people are the ‘haves not.’ The improvement of Canada’s health inequality as compared to U.S. appears to be interconnected with extensive variances in access to care, and social and economic inequality (Feeny, Kaplan, Huguet, & McFarland, 2010). There is lack of effective universal coverage in the U.S, which seems to decrease most inequalities in great quantity or quality of care. It is safe to say when the Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) was passed into law in March of 2010, advocates thought it would cover as much as the estimated 60 million individuals without insurance. However, as the overall program treks to full implementation process, things have looked differently. Therefore, things became utterly not the case.
Cacace & Schmid (2008) described how Canadian healthcare system was intended to improve health injustice. However, the question from the minds of many was if the U.S. is an exclusively liberal example of state involvement in public health policy, why has Canada not followed the footsteps of its neighbor, despite its profound integration and theoretical proximity? The differences between the values and respect of the two systems in federal and state budget roles seemed fairly the same, regardless of incomes, race, social ethnicity, and language barriers. What sets Canadian healthcare system different from U.S. is the ability to effectively tackle connected problems of income inequality, racial discrimination, social inequality, and language barriers. It is especially true since this dissimilarity marks up a significant constituent of national identity structure. Although healthcare systems of Canada and U.S were said to diverged mainly with respect to expenditure, financial structures, and their monitoring constructions; Cacace & Schmid (2008)’s observations for the past 15 years found co-existence of convergence in many extents such as financing, service delivery and some regulations. In cases of integrating features non-systematically detailed, both systems brought up new directions and more differing forms of care.
Feeny et al, 2010) in their research of comparing population health between U.S. and Canada, suggested that population health, HRQL, life expectancy, and HALE in Canada compare favorably to the U.S. Their data gathering consists of drawing such conclusion of favorability. They used Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) to measure overall health-related quality of life (HRQL). They also compared mean HUI3 scores while adjusting for significant determinants of health; body mass index between the two countries, the effect of smoking, education, gender, race, and income. They have also used the mean HUI3 scores by age and gender. Canadian and U.S. life tables were used to estimate health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE). The resulted data was astounding to show how, for example, Canadian life expectancy is higher than in the US- for those 40+ groups, HRQL appeared to be higher in Canada. Using factors associated with research outcomes, access to health care over a full life span, and lower levels of social and economic inequality account for the substantial difference as to why Canada appears to be healthier than U.S. population. The constitutional spending authority of Canadian federal government makes it less likely to confront current issues of health equality, amongst members of citizens.
According to OECD Health Data 2004 (2004), U.S. spends more health care per capita as does Canada, which spends about half of the U.S. However, her system of universal health insurance provides better and equitable access to care for its citizens. Likewise, U.S. healthcare system failed to use upstream investments to intervene the root causes of population health problem or benefit of its citizens. Canadians live 2 to 3 years longer than U.S. citizens. In addressing the determinants of health while reducing health inequalities, U.S. may adopt a Canadian and Australian system of “whole-of-government” and/or inter-sectorial approaches to health disparity (Health Council of Canada, 2010). Another important way of promoting population health, while reducing health inequality is the government commitment to implement policy-wide agendas that recognize an inclusive approach. This will ensure full-house initiatives. Such pledge should typically comprise within federal and state governmental reports that openly outlines goals and objectives (Health Council of Canada, 2010).
Public health agency of Canada and Canada health care organizations and association such as the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation, Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Diabetes Association, hospitals and professional associations have been involved in full-scale implementation of country’s health public policies. The US’s intervention for improvement should explore health organizational involvements that could impulse governments and policymakers to create public policies, which share the values of all communities regardless of their differences.
There is robust indication that an indispensable aspect of refining quality of social elements of health is ensure unionization of Canada’s workplace. U.S. public health practitioners and government agencies may review the period from Great Depression to the WWW II aftermaths when Canada strived to implement Medicare, public pension programs, unemployment insurance, and other federal and provincial programs that still work in providing more effective population health outcomes of its citizens.
Work Cited:
Cacace, M., & Schmid, A. (2008). The Healthcare Systems of the USA and Canada: Forever on Divergent Paths?. Social Policy & Administration, 42(4), 396-417
Feeny, D., Kaplan, M. S., Huguet, N., & McFarland, B. H. (2010). Comparing population health in the United States and Canada. Population Health Metrics, 8, 8–18.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Improving Population Health (n.d.). What is Population Health? Retrieved July 7, 2015 from http://www.improvingpopulationhealth.org/blog/what-is-population-health.html
Health Council of Canada. (2010). Stepping it up: Moving the focus from health care in Canada to a healthier Canada. Toronto, Canada: Health Council of Canada. Retrieved from http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2011/ccs-hcc/H174-22-2010-2-eng.pdf
OECD. (2004). OECD Health Statistics 2004. Retrieved July 7, 2015 from http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
