Comparing cancer mortality and GDP health expenditure in England and Wales with other major developed countries from 1979 to 2006

Mortality in the USA, the UK and Other Western Countries, 1989-2015: What Is Wrong With the US?

This population-based study compares U.S. effectiveness with 20 Other Western Countries (OWC) in reducing mortality 1989-1991 and 2013-2015 and, responding to criticisms of Britain's National Health Service, directly compares U.S. with U.K. child (0-4), adult (55-74), and 24 global mortality categories. World Health Organization Age-Standardized Death Rates (ASDR) data are used to compare American and OWC mortality over the period, juxtaposed against national average percentages of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Expenditure on Health (%GDPEH) drawn from World Bank data. America's average %GDPEH was highest at 13.53% and Britain's the lowest at 7.68%. Every OWC had significantly greater ASDR reductions than America. Current U.S. child and adult mortality rates are 46% and 19% higher than Britain's. Of 24 global diagnostic mortalities, America had 16 higher rates than Britain, notably for Circulatory Disease (24%), Endocrine Disorders (70%), External Deaths (53%), Genitourinary (44%), Infectious Disease (65%), and Perinatal Deaths (34%). Conversely, U.S. rates were lower than Britain's for Neoplasms (11%), Respiratory (12%), and Digestive Disorder Deaths (11%). However, had America matched the United Kingdom's ASDR, there would have been 488,453 fewer U.S. deaths. In view of American %GDPHE and their mortality rates, which were significantly higher than those of the OWC, these results suggests that the U.S. health care system is the least efficient in the Western world.

UK and Twenty Comparable Countries GDP-Expenditure-on-Health 1980-2013: The Historic and Continued Low Priority of UK Health-Related Expenditure

It is well-established that for a considerable period the United Kingdom has spent proportionally less of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health-related services than almost any other comparable country. Average European spending on health (as a % of GDP) in the period 1980 to 2013 has been 19% higher than the United Kingdom, indicating that comparable countries give far greater fiscal priority to its health services, irrespective of its actual fiscal value or configuration. While the UK National Health Service (NHS) is a comparatively lean healthcare system, it is often regarded to be at a 'crisis' point on account of low levels of funding. Indeed, many state that currently the NHS has a sizeable funding gap, in part due to its recently reduced GDP devoted to health but mainly the challenges around increases in longevity, expectation and new medical costs. The right level of health funding is a political value judgement. As the data in this paper outline, if the UK 'afforded' the same proportional level of funding as the mean average European country, total expenditure would currently increase by one-fifth.

Comparing UK and 20 Western countries' efficiency in reducing adult (55-74) cancer and total mortality rates 1989-2010: Cause for cautious celebration? A population-based study

Objective

Every Western nation expends vast sums on health, especially for cancer; thus, the question is how efficient is the UK in reducing adult (55–74) cancer mortality rates and total mortality rates (TMR) compared to the other Western nations in the context of economic-input to health, the percentage of Gross-Domestic-Product-expenditure-on-Health.

Design

WHO mortality rates for baseline 3 years 1989–1991 and 2008–2010 were analysed, and confidence intervals determine any significant differences between the UK and other countries in reducing the mortalities. Efficiency ratios are calculated by dividing reduced mortality over the period by the average % of national income.

Setting

Twenty-one similar socio-economic Western countries.

Participants

The 21 countries’ general population.

Main outcome measures

Cancer mortality rates, total mortality rates Gross Domestic Product and Efficiency Ratios.

Results

Economic Input: In 1980, UK national income was 5.6% and the European average was 7.1%. By 2010, UK national income was 9.4% being equal 17th of 21 averaging 7.1% over the period. Europe’s 1980–2010 average of 8.4% yields a UK to Europe ratio of 1:1.18.

Clinical output 1989–2010: UK Cancer Mortality Rates was the sixth highest, but equal sixth biggest fall, significantly greater than 14 other countries. UK Total Mortality Rates was the fifth highest but third biggest decline, significantly greater than 17 countries. UK’s cancer Efficiency Ratios is largest at 1:301 and second biggest for Total Mortality Rates at 1.1341; the USA ratios were 1:152 and 1:525, respectively.

Conclusions

UK reduced mortalities indicate that the NHS achieves proportionally more with relatively less, but UK needs to match European average Gross-Domestic-Product-expenditure-on-Health to meet future challenges.

Neurological deaths of American adults (55-74) and the over 75's by sex compared with 20 Western countries 1989-2010: Cause for concern

Background:

Have USA total neurological deaths (TNDs) of adults (55–74) and the over 75's risen more than in twenty Western Countries?

Methods:

World Health Organization TND data are compared with control mortalities cancer mortality rates (CMRs) and circulatory disease deaths (CDDs) between 1989–1991 and 2008–2010 and odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals calculated.

Results:

Neurological Deaths – Twenty country (TC) average 55–74 male rates per million (pm) rose 2% to 503 pm, USA increased by 82% to 627 pm. TC average females rose 1% to 390 pm, USA rising 48% to 560 pm. TC average over 75's male and female increased 117% and 143%; USA rising 368% and 663%, significantly more than 16 countries. Cancer mortality – Average 55–74 male and female fell 20% and 12%, USA down 36% and 18%. TC average over 75's male and female fell 13% and 15%, the USA 29% and 2%. Circulatory deaths – TC average 55–74 rates fell 60% and 46% the USA down 54% and 53%. Over 75's average down 46% and 39%, USA falling 40% and 33%. ORs for rose substantially in every country. TC average 75's ORs for CMR: TND male and females were 1:2.83 and 1:3.04 but the USA 1:5.18 and 1:6.50. The ORs for CDD: TND male and females TC average was 1:3.42 and 1:3.62 but the USA 1:6.13 and 1:9.89.

Conclusions:

Every country's neurological deaths rose relative to the controls, especially in the USA, which is a cause for concern and suggests possible environmental influences.

An analysis of National Health Service Trust websites on the occupational backgrounds of 'Non-Executive Directors' on England's Acute Trusts

Objectives

To explore the occupational backgrounds of English Non-Executive Directors (NED) on Acute National Health Service (NHS) Trusts.

Design

Data extrapolated from Trust websites of NED’ occupational backgrounds by gender and occupations, and inter-rater reliability test undertaken.

Setting

Data were available on all but 24 of the 166 Acute Trusts’ from all regions.

Participants

Trust Chairs and NED were categorised by their dominant occupation.

Main outcome measure

Differentiating NED with and without health or social care leadership experience.

Results

The ratings of NED’ occupations positively correlated (p < 0.001). Occupational categories were Commerce and Finance from private and public sectors or with Medical or Community leadership experience. Only 4% of Chairs were Medical, 2% from Community – the majority (61%) from Commerce and Finance. Of the 1001 NED, 8% and 6% respectively had Medical or Community leadership experience; most (86%) were Commerce, Finance and non-clinical Managerial backgrounds. Females made up 27% of NED.

Conclusions

With a predominance of Chairs and NED without health or social care leadership experience, are current Boards equipped to avoid inadvertently ‘doing the system's business’ (Francis, 2013) rather than developing a more patient-centred, clinically led and integrated NHS? It is suggested that Boards need more NED with health and social care leadership experience and methods to identify the ‘patient’s agenda’ to create ‘a common culture’ that places ‘patients at the centre of everything we do’ (Hunt, 2012). A key context for Trust Boards operations is funding, which Francis’ terms of reference excluded, an issue that is briefly discussed.