COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL PROFILES 1

Comparison of International profiles of Healthcare systems: the USA vs. India

Name

Affiliate Institution

Course

Date
COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL PROFILES 2

Comparison of International profiles of Healthcare systems: the USA vs. India

Introduction

The USA healthcare system comprises of a decentralized system of healthcare delivery.

While the government plays a role in healthcare delivery, individual states are responsible for the

management of healthcare facilities in the respective states. The government under the

Affordable Care Act led to the introduction of insurance cover in a bid to share the healthcare

delivery responsibility between individuals, employers, and the government. However, the USA

healthcare delivery system remains fragmented due to the presence of multiple players that

include private and public healthcare providers. The Indian Healthcare system, on the other hand,

relies on both the centralized and decentralized governments to deliver health care services

(Panda, 2016). To a larger extent, the Indian healthcare system uses the states to reach to its

population. So, each of the states is responsible for the functioning of their respective health

facilities. The central government also has some specific responsibilities, which makes the Indian

healthcare system incorporate both the central and decentralized health care organizations. The

central government is responsible for policy making, providing guidance, planning, evaluating,

and coordinating the operations of the various state health authorities. It also provides the

funding for implementing the various national programs. At the national level, India’s health

organization consists of the union ministry of health and family welfare as the primary foreseer

of the state health facilities under the leadership of the state minister. From the state level, the

health organization then divides further into a zonal organization that comprises of 3 – 5 districts

(Scheutz, 2013).

Similarities
COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL PROFILES 3

One of the similarities between the two countries’ health systems is the efforts to provide

publicly financed health insurance. Under the tax-financed public health system in India, health

services are available to everyone. The single limitation of the Indian Healthcare System is the

availability of multiple constraints before one can benefit from the tax-financed health care

services. Therefore, many patients prefer to seek private health services and thus the high

privately financed health expenditures in India at 69.1%. Both countries have placed health

services schemes for specific groups. Notably, in India, the central government provides health

schemes for the civil servants, railways and defense employees. The states on the other end also

have medical schemes for their employees. Despite the various plans, only slightly above 20% of

the Indian population is covered under different insurance schemes, which explain the high out-

of-pocket health expenditures. In the USA healthcare system, only 8.6 percent of the population

stands uninsured. Medicaid and Medicare programs are programs that have effectively increased

the coverage of the disadvantaged groups. These groups comprise of the elderly and the low-

income earners. There are also programs for kids from low-income families.

Differences

Physicians in government facilities are paid through salaries and are not allowed to work

in the private sector. The individual sector physicians earn according to the market conditions.

The government hospital structure for the Indian healthcare system consists of primary,

secondary, and tertiary facilities. The primary facilities are the first contact of health care to the

communities. These facilities are governed and run by the states. Then the structure proceeds to

the district and national hospitals that serve as referral hospitals. These facilities are administered

and operated under the annual government allocations. In the USA hospitals are independently

run by states. The central government only plays the role of financing the provision of health
COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL PROFILES 4

care services to specific groups through various programs such as the Medicaid and CHIP

programs. The infrastructural strategy of the USA, health care system, has the upper hand.

However, the decentralized governance introduces some loopholes that lead to a failure in the

superior infrastructure to reflect through quality health services (Thompson, 2011).

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be seen that the Indian healthcare system is more effective compared

to the US healthcare system although financial and infrastructural constraints bug it. The

inefficiency of the US results in a more expensive system. The high cost is as a result of a

decentralized system of governance that means the system has no higher authority than the feral

government. The presence of the central government in India’s health system results in better

regulation and appropriation of funds.

COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL PROFILES 5

References

Panda, B. T. (2016). Decentralization and Health System Performance - a Focused Review on

Dimensions, Difficulties, and Derivatives in India. PMC.

Scheutz, A. (2013). India's Healthcare System - Overview and Quality Improvements. Östersund.

Thomson, S., Osborn, R., Squires, D., & Reed, S. J. (2011). International profiles of health care

systems 2011: Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy,

Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United

States.