The Future of the Healthcare Industry

Quality in Healthcare

Quality in healthcare industry has been defined according difference in understanding of the healthcare. The physicians would define in different perceptions depending on the priorities of the professionals. Health regulators would define quality as the satisfaction of patients on the services provided by the healthcare professionals. Basically the quality of the health depends on the adherence to the work ethics and the set standards of the healthcare. Quality of the services in healthcare plays an important role in the patients’ and the general public perceptions of the healthcare. Thus the value of the healthcare greatly depends on the safety of the patient.

United States Healthcare Performance

Though the United States spend massive resources on the healthcare, it is ranked among the last in quality when compared to other developed countries. According to the survey on improving the health care, it was found that the US has a lot to do in order to equalize other developed countries. Precisely the US was rated to be performing poorly in terms of the efficiency of the services, accessibility and equity in provision of its services. According a research done by commonwealth Fund on health, a substantive number of the US patients (14 percent) suffering from chronic diseases were mistakenly given wrong medication. The percent value is quite higher compared to other countries in the same category (Shi & Singh, 2008). For instance the value of the error in Germany is a third that of the US. Another major problem with the US healthcare is the patients lacking medical care due to high cost of medication. In 2008, most of the US citizens with chronic illness (54 percent) were rendered helpless on medication compared to Netherlands which had a mere seven percent. The poor quality of the US health has been pointed by the medical experts to be the much paper work in offering the much needed services.

Basically the quality of the healthcare is important in reforming the healthcare systems. For the patients to receive treatment without the concern of cost, they ought to be protected by the health insurance (Kovner, Knickman, & Jonas, 2008). Thus the introduction of the health insurance for all would greatly improve the quality of the healthcare in the country. The commitment by the physicians to the medical practice is also a major factor in improving the quality of the healthcare. The research on healthcare quality hints that deaths occurring in the US healthcare system are high. To improve the safety to Patients, the country needs an easier system to deal with for the regulatory bodies to pursue on the carelessness of the physicians. The healthcare reforms would provide a better quality to the patients and the general public (Kovner, Knickman, & Jonas, 2008).

Provision of data on the patients’ outcomes, complying with the agencies regulations as well as the reduced cost of health would definitely produce a better healthcare to the citizens. Research shows that the hospital bureaucracy is the major hindrance in the provision of the healthcare in the United States. The procedures in the hospitals expose the patients to dangers of being given mistaken medication. The problems incurred in treating patients would need more improved clinical practice by the physicians. The mistake by the physicians acutely affects the overall quality of the healthcare. Though the academic qualifications and the presences of the regulation bodies are considered the major factors in the quality of the healthcare, personal discipline is also an important factor. Physicians should conduct themselves in a precise manner. Therefore tougher conditions on the precision of the clinical practice would provide a quality healthcare. The cost of health is also a major contributor to the preventable deaths due to illness in the US. The 54 percent of the patients missing healthcare due cost would greatly reduce if the cost of medication was a bit lower.

Quality Assurance

It wouldn’t be perfect for the physicians to believe in themselves for assessing their performance alone. In many cases the physicians are disregarded by the patients for erroneous treatment but little actions has been taken on them. For instance the National Practitioner Data Bank meant to disciple physicians for recklessness could only result in little actions. The electronic healthcare initiative provided less response to the grievances than it was meant to. Therefore the hospitals and the physicians cannot persecute their fellow physicians even for some serious mistakes taken. The problem with the professional reviews is the conflict of interest that physicians would protect their professional accreditations rather than protecting the patients. Currently the medical care is demanded to be vigilant on the physicians’ performance according to the standards (Young, 2010). This is done to ensure the sense of responsibility and accountability in the practice. The joint public and the physicians’ reviews would provide the platform for a more transparency in healthcare (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2007).  Basically, the joint collaboration between the public and the physician would ensure a higher quality services in medication, highly regarded peer reviews, higher efficiency and accountability. Basically the joint force would ensure a maximum utility of the hospital practice.

The presence of the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) as an independent body was meant to improve the quality of the performance in hospitals. One of the initiatives of the body was the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) (NCQA, 2011). The initiative allows the public to compare the functioning of the healthcare with the set standards. The HEDIS records submitted by the healthcare plans have been used to provide data on the performance of various healthcare plans. NCQA uses the HEDIS results to rank various healthcare plans .

Advantages of the HEDIS

The HEDIS initiate involves the public thus the process is quite thorough in scrutiny. The data from the HEDIS is quite important in making projections for the future. The HEDIS provides standards for the performance; for instance the improvement in the cost and the outcome in the healthcare. The performance of the HEDIS has been greatly pinned on the entire healthcare thus its presence as the measure, improves the standards of performance. The HEDIS is an initiative that cover a wider healthcare in the United States and it has been accepted by the major stakeholder that crediting the NCQA.


Despite the success of the HEDIS, the initiative raises quite a number of issues among the physicians and other stakeholders. HEDIS was censured for little concern in serious illness, shoddy insight on the cost effectiveness and general poor compliance to the recommendations by the government taskforce on the preventive services. The HEDIS has not been beneficial to the patient; the initiative has worsened the situations. The case of the Asthma was raised as a major problem associated with the prescription by the HEDIS. It preferred a controller prescription rather than a precise medication. The HEDIS has been discredited for possibility of conflict of interest in the setting of the standards for the healthcare system. The NCQA acquire most of its funds from the intuitions it regulates thus the issue setting low standards may arise in order to shield its financiers. Also the process of publishing the accreditations is not quite transparent.

The functioning of the HEDIS is based on the patients’ responses and compliance to the medications thus its accreditation may be affected by the poor compliance of the patients.

Like any other sector, the healthcare system ought to comply with the new technology. Technology for instance aids the physicians to treat each patient accordingly. The predictive modeling provides the physicians more precise requirements by the patients for certain medications. The process used the probability to close into the utmost appropriate medication. Another option for the physicians is the treatment using the peer reviews. Some algorithms are able to initiate a formula out of the reviews and provide the physicians in the most possible medication for the treatment patients with unique requirements. Basically the technology would provide an opportunity for the patients’ treatment based on the practice. Thus the precision would be adhered to utmost standards.

Technology in Healthcare

The technologies have developed devices that can enable the patients to communicate with the physicians over the internet without compromising on the quality of the services provided. The machines would take on the diagnosis on the patient then the results send to the physicians for give the medication. The discovery of the device has provided a more close relationship between the physicians and the patients.

Though the new technology has eased the provision of the medication, the critics’ fears the quality of the healthcare would drop due to monopoly and its difficulty monitor (Andersen, Ric, & Kominski, 2007). However the demerits on the technology, there are some significant advantages in its application: the new technology would aid the integration of the healthcare systems; the patients and the doctors would get to interact more thus the diagnosis would be even more precise; the cost of medication would definitely reduce in terms time saved by the traveling to the physical healthcare facility for a mild illness. Moreover the most important success of the new technology is the save for lives.