I feel like this course has now come full circle now that we’ve talked about end of life care and elderly care. From the social determinants of health to how the medical professions view death and terminal illness, I can see how our society came to revolve around health and fitness. The concept of the patient and patient experience though, is what really stood out to me, even though I’ve never been hospitalized and I can’t relate to this.
Coming from a multicultural background, long term care for the elderly has always been viewed as unnecessary and careless on the part of the children of the elderly person. Many cultures outside of the USA view that it is the children’s first and utmost responsibility to care for their parents. With these cultural differences aside, since America is so diverse in elderly care culture, how can these differences be taken into account by the government should the government start trying to fix the inequality in care giving that is going on due to the differences in privately owned nursing homes and assisted living companies?
According to various statistics taken, preventative health visits were higher in children who had Medicaid and CHIP insurance plans as opposed to those with private insurance (private: 83%; Medicaid: 88%). Those with private insurance also reported having to pay more out of pocket expenses than those with Medicaid and CHIP (private: 77%; Mediaid: 26%).
During lecture, it was mentioned that a certain medical school decided to implement an art appreciation class into the curriculum. After looking for the article, it was actually at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and certain studies have shown that by learning how to observe and analyze art, medical students had a better ability to observe their patients. My question is, should medical schools add humanities courses into their curriculum in hope for their students to become better doctors? What drawbacks could there be? Would students view these courses as unnecessary?
According to the Journal of American Medical Association, the prevalence of congenital heart defects in newborn infants is greater when the mother was diagnosed with pre-eclampsia. Although there isn’t enough research done on congenital heart defects and why the form, the association of pre-eclampsia of the mother and the heart defect in infants opens a wider lens as to how we view the medical relationship between mother and infant. The health of the mother and the health of the infant is tied closely together on how the mother takes care of her health.
I recently read an article dealing with gender issues, consisting of the treatment of women’s pain by doctors and hospitals. Apparently women’s pain isn’t taken as seriously as men’s pain. My question ties in with differences in gender and the stigmatization of women’s health. Women are viewed as having less tolerance to pain, being more emotional, and being less rational as opposed to men. It can be also said that women experience more abdominal and pelvic pain more often, so the hasty decision of doctors could be to a common ailment as opposed to a more serious problem. So when it comes to women’s health, why is it viewed in a rather stigmatized and unimportant part of the field of health?
After Professor Guseva’s lecture on the other healthcare systems in other countries, and with the majority of us agreeing with the fact that our country needs a reform in our healthcare system, would it even be possible? The majority who vote in this country are older Americans meanwhile college-aged groups vote the least. Many of the older American generations probably don’t want to change the way our healthcare system. What ways can we change the older American generation’s perspectives on healthcare reform? Would it be advisable for our country to completely reinvent a new system of reform or to keep the old system and slowly reform it?
I decided to take this class on the basis that it would be useful for me to have knowledge on the enterprise of healthcare in the United States so that I’d be able to apply any knowledge acquired into my future health profession. I came into this class knowing little to nothing about how the healthcare system functioned, what exactly entailed the ACA reform or how entrepreneurial the healthcare system is in the US. The first lecture made me realize that not everyone is as luck as I am when it comes to being able to pay for their healthcare. My entire perspective was shifted and I realized that many Americans are in need of financial aid for their healthcare expenses, but because our system is privatized, there is not much our government can do.
According to a post on Medical News Today, women who are privately insured receive fewer Cesarean sections than women who are not. The article explains that the study was done at Marin General Hospital by UC San Francisco, and that the women with private insurance had “access to 24-hour in-house obstetricians and midwives” which ultimately led to the drop in C-sections performed by doctors. Because these women had access to midwifery and around the clock service from OBs, the drop in C-sections can be substantiated, but the correlation between private insurance and the number of C-sections is not addressed in detail in the article.
Having recently watched a segment on pharmaceutical companies’ marketing strategies on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, there was a part where pharmaceutical companies are being sold information on how doctors prescribe their medication. With this information, drug companies can verify whether or not a doctor is prescribing their medication or the competitor’s medication. These drug companies also market their products to consumer/patients, which allows for a growing culture of entrepreneurial health care system. Pharmaceutical companies also incentivize doctors into buying their medications by giving them free lunch. With this information in mind, should pharmaceutical companies be encouraging the marketability of the physician-patient relationship?