Socioeconomic Gap Effects for Patients with Chronic Illness

Socioeconomic Gap Effects for Patients with Chronic Illness

In the history of Medicare, the process of preventing and treating people suffering from chronic illness has been highly valued; however, the plan has proved tiresome to accomplish. Coordination of process involved in care has shown promising results; hence, most health care providers have shifted their focus to the essence of care coordination. Planning and processing the process involved in combating the issue is essential in preventing and treating chronic illness victims. Reducing and understanding the gap in quality of care that is associated with people of lower socioeconomic status is critical in healthcare (Orgera & Artiga, 2018). This paper will discuss and evaluate the socioeconomic gap factor concerning the eminence of healthcare provision for patients suffering from chronic illness.

Socioeconomic Gap

Factors such as socioeconomic the process of care coordination required in treatment and control plan. As a result, it is the primary reason behind existing disparities in care delivery among individuals with chronic illnesses.

Description of the Gap and History

Historically, the treatment of victims with chronic disease has been a significant issue both to the individuals and the health care providers responsible; however, the recent approach has focused mainly on the coordination of the entire process of care provision in curbing the catastrophe (Orgera & Artiga, 2018). Effectiveness and efficiency in combating the issue rely on the coordination of the care process. Moreover, proper understanding and precise reduction of the gap concerning the superiority of care provided to persons of lower socioeconomic status will advise the method of treating and combating the issue of chronic illness in the community (Orgera & Artiga, 2018). Improvement of social determinants in health, for instance, social context, food, education, neighborhood, and physical environment, and economic stability, physical environment, region, food, school, health care system, as well as the community and social context is critical in managing both incidence and prevalence.

Impact of Socioeconomic Gap

Socioeconomic backgrounds, for example, patients from lower socioeconomic status, are faced with the challenge of managing the issue mainly due to lack of finance required in the care provision. As a result, the victims lack the supportive care needed for chronic illness, consequently exacerbating the issue. Proper management does not end with hospital admissions but also with good access to both social and financial factors. The socioeconomic factors have been shown to affect various patients suffering from chronic illness. For instance, due to a lack of finances to access healthcare, victims are unable to treat the initial stages of the chronic disease to the time the sickness advances to a higher risk level where they are forced to seek treatment at all costs (Orgera & Artiga, 2018). However, at such standards, the illness would have advanced to a much more critical level resulting in more loss of treatment and control.

How the Gap Affects Healthcare Delivery

Healthcare delivery to patients relies much on socioeconomic status. Chronic illness creates a persistent and substantial burden to both victims and healthcare providers in the United States. Besides, due to multiple conditions resulting from chronically ill patients, a well-coordinated system of treatment is required, which can be attained from different healthcare providers in different locations, making the process costly (Orgera & Artiga, 2018). For example, a typical condition sees five specialists and two primary care providers per year. In the case of a more complex situation, victims are forced to seek treatment from more than sixteen specialists per year.

Consequently, chronic disease victims with lower SES have been determined to increase cases of mortality and mobility (Girijala & Bush, 2018). Moreover, the issue of the low levels of education as well as lack of proper awareness another problem in combating chronic illness. As per Girijala and Bush (2018), patients with little knowledge of the disease are more prone to deaths since the majority of them are unable to manage and know when to seek medical attention.

Potential Implications if the Gap is not Addressed

The federal government, as well as healthcare providers, should work tirelessly to reduce the ever-increasing gap of socioeconomic in the excellence of care organizations of individuals with chronic disease. (Girijala & Bush, 2018). However, failure to reduce the deficit would result in various repercussions. For example, the general health, as well as the productivity rate of the people, will suffer drastically. Moreover, it will cause adverse impacts in both the healthcare industry and the population in general. In a scenario where chronic disease is not managed at its initial stages, it will result in considerable financial burden both to the healthcare system as well as the victims.

Existing Initiatives

More significant plans for prevention and management of chronic diseases are necessary to decrease economic disparities besides ethnic and racial lines and hence a healthier, prosperous nation for all. The U.S is working tirelessly in combating the issue of chronic illness. Reduction and elimination of both health and healthcare disparity have been the leading initiative in the healthcare system over a decade.

Initiative Description

The significant effort involved the decline of health disparity, the establishment of National Center Health Disparity and Minority Health, authorization of Agency responsible for Quality and Healthcare Research, Education Act of 2000, Health Disparity Research, and the Minority Health (Girijala & Bush, 2018). The initiative has engaged a significant part in the health sector, for instance, in measuring and assessing the process involved in the reduction of health disparities.

Goals and Development of the Initiative

As per Girijala & Bush (2018), the Affordable Care Act has played a significant role in advancing the process of reduction of disparities and the improvement of Health and Health Care. ACA has broadened and expanded coverage in population in both health and healthcare. Moreover, it has an increase in funding for various communities affected as well as increase healthcare provision for the disparity groups accomplishing great achievement and improvement. Reduction of disparity has been the primary concern of ACA through various instances such as the introduction of the Offices of Minority Health, which is incorporated in the HHS agencies with the primary responsibility of coordination and reduction of disparity in the entire health system (Girijala & Bush, 2018). Additionally, the creation of Prevention and Public Health Fund, research efforts and data collection, education material and cultural competence training, promotion of workforce diversity has been other concerns associated with ACA to reduce disparity in healthcare.

Department of Health and Human Services introduced an action strategy intending to eliminate ethnic health and racial disparity in 2011 (Girijala & Bush, 2018). REACH also the Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health collaborated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, local health departments, as well as other states implemented community interventions with the main agenda of reducing and eliminating specified neighborhood disparity (Girijala & Bush, 2018). These various initiatives aimed at reducing and eliminating the issue of inequality in healthcare were developed after different research was conducted on healthcare disparity. For instance, the release of Surgeon General reports, which indicated a high prevalence of variation in access to the use and health services by ethnicity and race.

Resources and Why the Initiative is Underperforming

The various departments have played a crucial part in the lessening process through funding. For instance, several states, universities, and non-profit organizations, the local health department, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, et cetera have played critical roles in funding various initiatives aimed at reducing healthcare disparity (Kindig, Lardinois & Chatterjee, 2016). Moreover, different private foundations, for example, care managers and providers, Medicaid programs, and states, are vital resources in the provision and funding of various initiatives.

Affordable Care Act has achieved tremendous success in ensuring people with lower levels of income and the people of color, as indicated by a drop of 2% from 13% to 11% in 2015 for uninsured, nonelderly, and elderly population (Kindig, Lardinois & Chatterjee, 2016). However, coverage disparity is still a challenge. Despite the incorporation of various states such as new health insurance and Medicaid expansion, a vast number of lower SES are still facing issues in attaining health for chronic illness. Recent reduction to enrolment and outreach, the ever-changing federal policy priorities, et cetera has reduced the plan and the objective of the initiatives.

Regulations

Current Regulations and Regulatory Level

Affordable Care Act 2010 regulation is a body responsible for ensuring all Americans in healthcare. Usually, the U.S medical cost is highly expensive, and the introduction of ACA has brought great relief to a large number of American citizens as it was initially developed to cut off and reduce costs (Kindig, Lardinois, & Chatterjee, 2016). Treating and managing a chronic illness is highly expensive, and a large number of the population is unable to control. ACA has provided health opportunities for both natural citizens, including the disparity population, such as the people of color. Health care cost has limited other essential sectors, such as advancement and development in technology, education, and housing (Kindig, Lardinois, & Chatterjee, 2016). ACA has primarily assisted in cutting and reducing health care costs incurred by most Americans. As per Kindig, Lardinois, and Chatterjee (2016), approximately 20 million people have been able to secure health insurance.

ACA is a federal level regulation that provides insurance subsidies to individuals below the poverty level. Moreover, apart from reducing costs, ACA is focusing on the prevention of diseases. ACA is provided and guarded by the federal laws. Additionally, the regulation is key in the general health care provisions has it covers a wide area hence ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of health care delivery as well as safeguarding other related healthcare regulations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, various initiatives play a crucial role in the provision of healthcare for the disparity population. Care and more concern are required in preventing and eliminating healthcare disparity due to socioeconomic in both ethnic and racial lines. ACA has enabled people of lower social and economic status to attain quality health care. Besides, ACA was introduced and managed by the federal government; hence its plays a vital role in supporting other healthcare regulations. Moreover, there are no conflicts associated with ACA in the provision of health care.