Introduction
Modern American medicine has been through a long and fruitful evolution process since the time of its assumptive and started in the 19th century. Having started from just a set of herbal remedies in an average household reference book, it has evolved into a complex system in the post-industrial era, however, remains divided to this day. Generally, there has been an apparent improvement in patient condition with the introduction of innovative technological and more effective methods to teach medical professionals.
Main body
Since the dawn of the post-industrial era, medicine was destined to develop, and reaching new heights was practically essential in that field. Clark (2016) writes on the notion of “confidence” of medical professionals in the the1900s, “even in the face of continued epidemics of smallpox, cholera, and tuberculosis,” they believed medicine could solve “problems that for centuries had seemed intractable” (p. 34). America entered the next century with bright hope and an enhanced interest in improving the medical field. Many governments have recognized the importance of medicine and were “passing the first social welfare acts and government-run or voluntarily subsidized health care programs” (Manchikanti et al., 2017, p. 108). This time – the end of the 19th and the first decade of the 20th century gave modern medicine its urge for improvement. As a result, expansion of medical knowledge, improvement of hospital conditions, and governmental reforms concerned with healthcare made it accessible to the majority of the population.
Since that period, the healthcare department has continued to evolve and progress. Apparently, one of the most significant changes in that field was the introduction of Medicaid and Medicare on July 30th, 1965, by President Johnson (Manchikanti et al., 2017, p. 108). Later, there were countless suggestions for a universal program by later presidents, but they were either insignificant or have not passed (Manchikanti et al., 2017). Other attempts in the last quarter of the 20th century were not fruitful either.
There is a stable trend in opposing the universal healthcare system in the United States, and it has been going on for about a century now. In fact, the United States is the only country among progressive industrialized democracies in the world without any nationwide healthcare coverage (Mitra, 2018). The reasons for it are versatile, and each demands a closer inspection. One motive is a simple idea that Americans oppose because of their unique cultural complexion. Historically, the US has not been a congenerous nation, with people of a wide array of cultural backgrounds all calling themselves American (Mitra, 2018). Thus, presuming inequality in the fabric of the nation and lack of the feeling of “sameness” is one part of the reason for the lack of unified healthcare.
Another is concerned with influential interest groups and, particularly, their lack of interest. According to Mitra (2018), “Universal Health Care was on the national political plan for approximately a hundred years until a health care reform bill supported by President Obama in 2010” (p. 17). Special interests are fond of lobbying lawmakers not to pass reform, and generally, that was the case with healthcare acts. The compilation of these factors has been stopping the enactment of the law that would establish universal care in the US.
The success of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is quite simple in nature – it attempted to eliminate the most popular reason for failing to get medical help. For the majority of Americans, according to Ward (2017), the reason remains to be cost-related; however, with the expansion of ACA into different states, the percentage has decreased. The ACA was also beneficial, in particular to low-income individuals: its coverage was “associated with significant improvements in access to primary care and medications, affordability of care, preventive visits, screening tests, and self-reported health” (Sommers et al., 2017, p. 1124). In this manner, ACA has been trying to eliminate the main barrier to getting medical services – their high cost.
Despite this, the quality of medical services has been in a constant state of improvement with the enhancement of medical education and innovations in the technical field. Morilla et al. (2017) discuss technology implementations in medicine, exploring E-Health and telemedicine, among others, in detail. A great number of doctors found these technical methods to be bettering their practice, overall resulting in a positive report of their experience with new technology (Morilla et al., 2017). Thus, it can be seen that technical innovations are greatly enhancing medicine and actually allowing for new possibilities for both the patients and the clinicians.
Medical education has also experienced a significant number of renovations. One that had the most success but is technically not as innovative as other technical implementations are the use of simulations. Sakakuchev et al. (2017) note that “medical disciplines have used simulation training type models for centuries – such as cadaveric dissections” (p. 123). Today simulation is associated with computer capabilities that have “enhanced the construction of complex anatomical and physiological systems programmed to respond to the inputs of a user” (Sakakuchev et al., 2017, p. 123). These models provide the possibility of perfecting a skill to a greater extent for medical professionals, which directly influences the quality of the medical services received by the population.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is suitable to say that, although there is still no unified, governmental-financed medical system in the US, healthcare is still being financed and improved majorly. This applies to both the technical and informational aspects, which both influence the quality of medical services significantly. It is no less important how healthcare reforms, such as ACA, have majorly improved healthcare access for underprivileged populatio
References
Clark, D. (2016). History of palliative medicine since nineteenth century. Oxford, United Kingdom. Oxford University Press.
Machikanti, L., Helm, S., Benyamin R. M., & Hirsch, J. A. (2017). Evolution of a health care reform. Pain Physician, 20(1), 107-110.
Mitra, M. (2018). Free universal health care system in United States. Journal of Political Science and International Relation, 1(1), pp. 16-22.
Morilla, M. D. R., Sans, M., Casasa, A., & Gimenez, N. (2017). Implementing technology in healthcare: Insights from physicians. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 17(92), 1-9.
Sakakuchev, B., Marinov, B. I., Stefanova, P. P., Kostianev, S. S., & Georgiou, E. K. (2017). Striving for better medical education: the simulation approach. Folia Medica, 59(2), 123-131.
Sommers, B., Maylone, B., Blendon, R. J., Orav, J., & Epstein, A. (2017). Three-year impacts of the Affordable Care Act: Improved medical care and health among low-income adults. Health Affairs, 36(6), 1119-1128.
Ward, B. W. (2017). Barriers to health care for adults with multiple chronic conditions: United States, 2012-2015. NCHS Data Brief, 275, 1-7.