Latest news with #healthoutcomes
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
How Healthcare Costs in 9 Wealthy Countries Compare To the US in 2025
Healthcare spending in the U.S. remains the highest among wealthy countries, with $13,432 spent per person each year, according to the latest data from Peterson-KFF. That's almost twice as much as countries such as the United Kingdom, France or Australia. Despite that, the U.S. ranks last overall among 10 high-income nations for access, efficiency and health outcomes, according to an analysis by The Commonwealth Fund. Read Now: Find Out: Other countries have figured out how to spend less on healthcare and get more. Here's how the numbers break down. Australia Performance rank: 1 Per-person spend: $6,931 Australia tops the list overall, but still has problems. About half of patients without private insurance face long waits for care, and affordability is an ongoing issue despite some billing fixes. Still, the country scores high for fairness, runs an efficient system and gets good health results. Discover Next: Netherlands Performance rank: 2 Per-person spend: $7,737 The Netherlands uses private health insurance, but it's tightly regulated and covers everyone, keeping costs low for patients and making care easy to get. The Netherlands ranks near the top for fairness and quality of care, but doesn't lead on health outcomes. United Kingdom Performance rank: 3 Per-person spend: $6,023 The United Kingdom spends less than half of what Americans spend per person, offering mostly free care through the National Health Service. It's one of the most affordable and efficient systems, with low paperwork for doctors. New Zealand Performance rank: 4 Per-person spend: $6,368 New Zealand spends less than half of the U.S. costs but ranks highest for how well care is delivered. It's strong on prevention and patient safety, with a system that rewards doctors for keeping people healthy. Still, New Zealand struggles with fairness; people with less money and those living outside cities find it harder to get care. France Performance rank: 5 Per-person spend: $7,136 France spends just over half of what Americans do per person. It's public insurance covers most care, and people pay only a small part of the costs out of pocket. The government keeps drug prices low, and health outcomes are good, especially for chronic diseases and maternal health. Sweden Performance rank: 6 Per-person spend: $7,522 Sweden focuses on fairness and preventing illness, but scores lower than other countries for quality of care. Some data on fairness by income weren't available, but overall, access and outcomes are solid. Canada Performance rank: 7 Per-person spend: $7,013 Canada spends just over half as much as the U.S. per person. Most care is publicly funded, and primary care access is good. But income affects how easily people get care, and wait times remain an issue despite spending less. Switzerland Performance rank: 8 Per-person spend: $9,688 Switzerland spends more than most countries here, but still less than the U.S. Insurance is private but required and regulated. The system faces challenges with fairness and paperwork, but does well on some health outcomes, especially around childbirth and postpartum care. Germany Performance rank: 9 Per-person spend: $8,441 Germany has universal coverage through nonprofit insurers with regulated prices, and copayments are capped by income to keep care affordable. Equity is strong and outcomes are solid, though not top of the class. More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 Here's the Minimum Salary Required To Be Considered Upper Class in 2025 10 Unreliable SUVs To Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on How Healthcare Costs in 9 Wealthy Countries Compare To the US in 2025
Medscape
5 days ago
- Health
- Medscape
Is Your Practice Free From Weight Bias?
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Weight bias and stigma are common in clinical settings and contribute to negative health outcomes. Weight bias refers to negative beliefs, judgments, and assumptions about people with excess weight. Weight stigma is how those biases are expressed through harmful stereotypes and behaviors. Examples of weight stigma in healthcare include blaming all symptoms on weight, leading to misdiagnoses; giving less time, attention, or empathy to patients with excess weight; using judgmental verbal or nonverbal cues; and failing to provide a supportive physical environment. As providers, we can take several steps to reduce bias and to create a more inclusive environment. First, ensure that your space is physically accommodating. Use chairs that are at least 35 inches wide or sturdy love seats that support over 300 pounds. Provide appropriately sized patient gowns, from XL to 4XL; long tape measures; and large blood pressure cuffs. Use a wide-base scale that supports over 500 pounds and conduct the weigh-ins privately. Choose weight-sensitive artwork, reading materials, and videos. It is also important to use patient-first language, which is a way of speaking that prioritizes the individual over their example, say "a person with obesity," not "an obese person." Avoid harmful labels like "fat," "heavy," or "large." Always ask permission before discussing weight, and if a patient is not ready to discuss their weight, move on and let them know that you're ready when they are. Train your entire team on respectful communication and inclusive practices. By addressing these issues, we can improve trust, patient experience, and health outcomes.
Forbes
07-07-2025
- Health
- Forbes
Public Health Is Getting Precise – Let's Make Sure It's Fair
An aerial view of houses in Jersey City, United States on July 13, 2024. (Photo by Jakub ... More Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images) It may sound like a contradiction, but public health—the field built on serving entire populations—is becoming more precise. At its core, precision public health seeks to marry the tools of big data, genomics, and individualized insights with population-level interventions. The surprising twist? By focusing on smaller population units, specific communities, neighborhoods, or even individuals, interventions can be more effectively tailored, improving outcomes while reducing inefficiencies and unintended consequences. Public health has long embraced the principle of serving the many, with sweeping interventions aimed at benefiting entire populations. Public health accomplishments, include community sanitation policies, vaccination campaigns, and smoking cessation programs. These efforts, built on the understanding of generalized patterns in populations, have saved countless lives. Recent advancements in technology, such as the ability to analyze large amounts of data and detection of disease risk using AI frameworks, are drastically changing how public health practitioners develop interventions. Precision public health is assuredly the next great leap in improving health and well-being for the masses. However, we are faced with the question, is precision public health equitable or at risk of exacerbating health disparities? For some, it feels like a contradiction. Public health is rooted in equity, aiming to level the playing field for all — not just those with access to individual, personalized treatment and therapeutics. Critics worry that even the term "precision" conjures the idea of individual health. This descriptor shifts attention away from determining factors of health, such as poverty, housing, education, and systemic racism and discrimination, which contribute to a community's quality of life and their health span. Cultural biases, accessibility, and systemic inequities in healthcare could turn a promising innovation into yet another mechanism that widens gaps rather than bridging them. When applied thoughtfully, precision public health can enhance — not replace — the principles of equity and prevention. For example, advanced mapping technologies can identify urban heat spots, helping to target cooling interventions for neighborhoods that are at higher risk for unhealthy temperatures, or being able to accurately predict everyone's risk profile for diabetes using their weight change patterns. Similarly, machine learning algorithms can better detect, diagnose, and treat diseases by reducing unwanted variations in blood data removing a potential challenge to using metabolite profiles of blood samples for research or improve standard of care when triaging patients during the Covid-19 pandemic using an algorithm on electronic health data. The challenge, then, lies in implementation. To realize the potential of precision public health, equity must remain the foundation, which can be applied in several ways: While precision technologies can provide incredible insights, they should not distract from addressing the root causes of health disparities. Precision public health should empower systemic change rather than reinforce the status quo. Ultimately, precision public health is is a tool — a powerful one — that must be wielded with care. By anchoring it in the principles of equity and prevention, we can harness its potential to address both individual needs and the collective wellness of entire populations. As we stand at this crossroads, the path we choose will define the future of health and wellness. With deliberate action and conscientious oversight, precision public health could complement traditional approaches, creating a more inclusive and effective model for improving health outcomes. Whether it becomes the future of wellness or an empty buzzword, it depends on our commitment to using it fairly.
Yahoo
03-07-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Calling all women: The IWK Foundation wants to hear your health stories
The IWK Foundation has launched a survey in the hopes of better understanding women's health experiences in the Maritime provinces and to address the disparity in health outcomes between men and women. The foundation is a not-for-profit organization that raises funds to support IWK Health, a major hospital in Halifax that provides care to women, youth and children from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. Jennifer Gillivan, president and CEO of the foundation, said the online survey invites women ages 18 and up to share their perspectives about their overall health experiences, challenges and outcomes. It also asks questions about their health in different stages of their life. "Part of our mandate is to educate and advocate for women. And so we realized — we need to hear from women. We need women's voices," said Gillivan in an interview on Thursday. "I mean, you go out to eat with your girlfriends or your family and you start talking about experiences in health, and they don't stop talking. So we thought this is a phenomenal way to kind of collect all that data and then understand where the pressure points are." The survey is anonymous. It includes questions like: "What positively or negatively impacts your overall physical health the most?" There is also a full page dedicated to sharing in detail "the good, bad or ugly" of one's health-care story. The results, which will be reviewed by a team of researchers, will help inform where women need more support and where there are gaps in the system, said Gillivan. This could include gaps in education and awareness or access to tools and information. But most importantly, it seeks to fundamentally change how women's health is understood, prioritized and delivered in a country where women spend 25 per cent more time in poor health than men, said Gillivan. "There needs to be a real push on women's research, because research informs care. It changes everything. And we need better training for doctors on women's health," she said. Gillivan said women's health has been historically under-researched and underfunded, with just seven per cent of total national research funding allocated to it, despite women making up 50 per cent of the population. She said the findings of the report will inform the IWK's own practices and operations, but will also be shared with anyone else who wants it, including governments, health authorities and other non-profits across Canada. It will also help guide efforts to educate the wider community that women's bodies are fundamentally different than men's, and their health care needs to be prioritized and researched, she said. Maggie Archibald is a patient advocate based in Halifax who has struggled with chronic pain for 18 years due to endometriosis that was only officially diagnosed two years ago. She said she often felt dismissed by the health-care system. "You symptoms are often not believed and women often have to fight harder to get help," said Archibald. "I'm really excited to see the results and what comes out of this and hopefully we can have some real change." The foundation expects to share the results publicly on Oct. 1. Click here to take the IWK Foundation's survey. MORE TOP STORIES
CBC
03-07-2025
- Health
- CBC
Calling all women: The IWK Foundation wants to hear your health stories
The IWK Foundation has launched a survey in the hopes of better understanding women's health experiences in the Maritime provinces and to address the disparity in health outcomes between men and women. The foundation is a not-for-profit organization that raises funds to support IWK Health, a major hospital in Halifax that provides care to women, youth and children from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. Jennifer Gillivan, president and CEO of the foundation, said the online survey invites women ages 18 and up to share their perspectives about their overall health experiences, challenges and outcomes. It also asks questions about their health in different stages of their life. "Part of our mandate is to educate and advocate for women. And so we realized — we need to hear from women. We need women's voices," said Gillivan in an interview on Thursday. "I mean, you go out to eat with your girlfriends or your family and you start talking about experiences in health, and they don't stop talking. So we thought this is a phenomenal way to kind of collect all that data and then understand where the pressure points are." The survey is anonymous. It includes questions like: "What positively or negatively impacts your overall physical health the most?" There is also a full page dedicated to sharing in detail "the good, bad or ugly" of one's health-care story. The results, which will be reviewed by a team of researchers, will help inform where women need more support and where there are gaps in the system, said Gillivan. This could include gaps in education and awareness or access to tools and information. But most importantly, it seeks to fundamentally change how women's health is understood, prioritized and delivered in a country where women spend 25 per cent more time in poor health than men, said Gillivan. "There needs to be a real push on women's research, because research informs care. It changes everything. And we need better training for doctors on women's health," she said. Gillivan said women's health has been historically under-researched and underfunded, with just seven per cent of total national research funding allocated to it, despite women making up 50 per cent of the population. She said the findings of the report will inform the IWK's own practices and operations, but will also be shared with anyone else who wants it, including governments, health authorities and other non-profits across Canada. It will also help guide efforts to educate the wider community that women's bodies are fundamentally different than men's, and their health care needs to be prioritized and researched, she said. Maggie Archibald is a patient advocate based in Halifax who has struggled with chronic pain for 18 years due to endometriosis that was only officially diagnosed two years ago. She said she often felt dismissed by the health-care system. "You symptoms are often not believed and women often have to fight harder to get help," said Archibald. "I'm really excited to see the results and what comes out of this and hopefully we can have some real change." The foundation expects to share the results publicly on Oct. 1.
