Nearly Half of Adults Think U.S. Healthcare System Is Failing

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Almost half of American adults (44%) give the U.S. healthcare system poor or failing grades, according to a new Gallup survey that found most respondents concerned about rising medical costs and growing healthcare inequality. Overall, the healthcare system was given a barely passing grade of C-minus.

"After years of higher prices, growing inequities, skipping treatments, getting sicker, or borrowing money to pay medical bills, it's no wonder so many Americans view the health system so poorly," said Timothy Lash, President of West Health, a group of healthcare non-profits that commissioned the survey.

The survey of nearly 5,600 Americans in all 50 states was conducted in June, with a nationally representative sample reflecting racial and ethnic backgrounds.

The worst overall grade on the healthcare report card – a D-minus – was given to the cost of care. One in four adults (26%) did not seek treatment due to cost in the last three months; while one in three (35%) are concerned they will be unable to afford healthcare in the next 12 months.  

Healthcare in America Report Card

source: west health-Gallup

The affordability issue is worse for those living with chronic health conditions. About 1 in 5 skipped care to pay for other household expenses, compared to about one in eight of those without chronic conditions.

“When members of my family have needed surgeries or medications [they] have to really consider how much medical debt they’re willing to go into. Our healthcare system forces us to try and make calculations between financial security and health just because of how expensive things are, and that’s even with health insurance, so I can’t imagine if you didn’t have health insurance how fraught that would be,” said survey participant Stef Schloo, 28, who lives in Pennsylvania

“I am single and so all of that falls down on me. And the only thing that would concern me is if I really developed a major health situation or, God forbid, if I was in a major accident or had to have long-term care, that’s a great concern to me,” said Patricia Slough, 67, who lives in Massachusetts.

Quality of care was the only aspect of the healthcare system that received more positive than negative marks, although it was still only able to earn an overall grade of C-plus. Women were less likely to give good grades for quality than men (38% vs. 57%); and Black and Hispanic Americans were also less likely to give a good grade for quality than the general population (36% each vs. 47%).

“You can have some of the best doctors in the world practicing here. I’m not saying that other countries don’t have great doctors, but I think our healthcare professionals can be second to none depending on where you go in America,” said Andrew Kerner, 30, who lives in North Carolina.

Healthcare Access and Equity

The grades for access to care and equitable care also broke down along racial lines. Two-thirds of Black Americans (66%) and Asian Americans (64%) selected a grade of D or F for health equity, which is the ability of every person to get quality care regardless of race and ethnicity. By comparison, Hispanic Americans (55%) and White Americans (53%) gave a poor or failing grade to equity,

Women, Blacks, Hispanics and Asian Americans were also more critical when it came to access to care. More than 40% in each of these groups gave access D’s and F’s, compared to about a third of White Americans and men.

“For the richest country on earth I think we have the most deplorable healthcare system... due to its inequity, mainly due to the way it all depends on how much money somebody has whether they get good healthcare or not,” said Anne Courtney Davis, 71, who lives in Ohio.

The survey also found that most younger and middle-aged adults are worried that Medicare and Social Security will not be available to them when they become eligible. That sentiment cuts across political lines, with 71% of Democrats, 66% of independents and 62% of Republicans worried or extremely worried about not having access to Medicare. When it comes to Social Security, there is even more agreement — 77% of Democrats, 75% of independents and 73% of Republicans are worried it won’t be there for them when they grow older.

Under an 11-point plan by Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, funding for Social Security, Medicare and other so-called entitlements would have to be put to a vote in Congress every five years.

“When I witness these individuals say that Medicare should be renewed every five years, it kind of makes me nervous [it’s] not going to be there for individuals when we get older,” said Nick Lembo, 27, of Indiana. “That’s startling to me because you should want to take care of those who are older than you because eventually... you’re going to be at that age.”

Does Transparency in Pricing Really Lower Healthcare Costs?

By Barby Ingle, PNN Columnist

Each year I get asked to support multiple legislative bills that could impact the chronic pain community. I look through them, think them through, and have written, called, testified and shared many over the years.

But sometimes a bill I supported comes back to haunt me as a patient. The intended consequences are not what I thought they would be.

Such is the case in Arizona, where I live. A state law was passed in 2013 calling for transparency in healthcare pricing (HB 2045). The law requires most healthcare providers to tell patients the “direct pay price” for a service or procedure. I always thought it was a good thing to have transparency in pricing and for patients to know what their responsibility is, so I supported the bill.

In 2019, Arizona passed another law (HB 2166) that authorized providers to collect “advance payments” from patients before a service is performed and without waiting for insurers to pay. The new law was quick to be adopted and providers have already started using it more than expected. This is causing an issue in getting the healthcare we need in a proper and timely manner.

The law really didn't affect me until this year, when I went through all the testing and multiple office visits with a new provider. Then I was called to the office of the “scheduling manager.” This was right after the doctor told me that I need a procedure on my bladder. I have an issue known as neurogenic bladder, where I lose control of my bladder nerves and muscles.

In the office, the woman wrote on a piece of paper the cost of the procedure ($30,000) based on my insurance (Medicare) and how much I would have to pay in advance, which was $6,000.

Before the law went into effect, I could pay the bill over time and get the procedure done when I needed it. But now, she says, I had to pay the entire $6,000 before even scheduling the procedure. I do not have $6,000 to pay upfront, so I am unable to schedule it.

New Hospital Rules

Arizona is not the only state that has passed healthcare price transparency laws; California, Connecticut, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont have similar laws.

Federal rules are slated to go into effect in January, 2021 that will require hospitals to disclose their price information, including their negotiated prices with insurers. It is part of an effort by the Trump administration to increase price transparency in hopes of lowering healthcare costs on everything from hospital services to prescription medicines.

The federal efforts are controversial and have already faced court challenges. For good reason, seeing how transparency is being implemented in Arizona.  

Both HB 2045 and HB 2166 are good examples of bills I advocated for that are now being used against me and others in the chronic pain community who are low income or under-insured. It’s just a new way to stop healthcare or slow it down. Instead of having insurance companies delay care with prior authorizations and step therapy -- which I have been through as well -- they stop you at the doctor's office now.  

The same thing happened when I came down with Valley Fever pneumonia this past November. My provider ordered chest x-rays, but before I could get them, I had to pay my portion of the bill. I had to borrow money to get the x-rays done.  

Turns out I was way sicker than my provider thought and he apologized afterwards. Once I was diagnosed, follow up x-rays were covered, except when one lady was at the desk. She always charges me and says she has to because of the price transparency rules.  

I am hearing more and more stories about HB 2166 being used against the chronic and rare disease communities. As I said, it is odd to not want full transparency, but I would rather have access to healthcare when it is needed and then work on paying the bill afterward. Otherwise, like me, many of you may not receive the care you need, making our health worse and more expensive. 

Barby Ingle lives with reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), migralepsy and endometriosis. Barby is a chronic pain educator, patient advocate, and president of the International Pain Foundation. She is also a motivational speaker and best-selling author on pain topics. More information about Barby can be found at her website. 

Why Does Treating Chronic Pain Cost So Much?

By Carol Levy, PNN Columnist

Five weeks ago, I had a deep brain stimulator implanted in a last-ditch effort to relieve my trigeminal neuralgia pain or at least make it more acceptable.

Prior to the surgery, I was required by Medicare to be evaluated by a neuropsychologist. His personal conclusions about me, plus some standardized cognitive testing, would decide if I have the cognitive ability to understand the surgical risks and the procedure itself. He also decides if I am mentally sound enough to tolerate the operation and all that goes with it.

I have not yet received a bill from him, but based on other costs I would expect the 2 to 3 hours I spent with him to cost around $300-$500.

Why is this? Why waste the insurance company's money, my time, the doctor's time, and if I have a copay, my personal money? My neurosurgeon should be aware enough and savvy enough to make such determinations.

I have had other brain implants in 1986, 1987 and 1991. At the time, they were a relatively new procedure and the risks probably worse given their newness.

But my neurosurgeon was fully able to make his own decisions as to my ability to understand and emotionally tolerate the uncertainty and risk.  It was required then, as it is now, that the patient have a trial period of 7 to 10 days between temporarily implanting the device and putting it in permanently. If the patient doesn’t see a benefit, then the implant is determined to have failed and not worth a permanent implantation.

That is all well and good, except for the fact that some patients do not see any benefit or change in the pain for two, three or sometimes up to 6 months.

By having to endure a trial, the patient has to go through 2 surgeries, 2 general anesthesia, and at least 10–14 days in the hospital. The cost to insurance is gigantic. The cost to the patient potentially even higher:

My first implant had no benefit at trial, but my surgeon went ahead with the permanent implantation anyway. After about a month I told him I was having no benefit. We agreed he should remove it. But until I made a date to do so, for some reason, maybe because it never occurred to me to turn it off, I left the implant on.

My trigeminal neuralgia at that point was so bad I had to get my face washed under general anesthesia every few months, as any touch to the affected area of my face was torturous.

One morning, three months after the implant, I stepped into the shower, a drop of water hit my face and there was no pain! I could touch that area of my face and the spontaneous pain and the background constant pain were all gone. Had the implant been removed because of the failed trial, I would never had had the opportunity to have that relief.

How many times have we been told by a doctor to try a treatment, medication or therapy that we have already tried to no avail? How often has insurance required us to try the cheaper drug first, by virtue of "step therapy" also known as "fail first"?

Chronic pain has been estimated to cost the U.S. over $635 billion annually in medical expenses and lost productivity, which is more than the cost for cancer, heart disease and diabetes.

Why is it that chronic pain costs the country so much? Maybe if we got rid of some of these “requirements” and just let doctors and patients do the deciding, the costs would go down.

Carol Jay Levy has lived with trigeminal neuralgia, a chronic facial pain disorder, for over 30 years. She is the author of “A Pained Life, A Chronic Pain Journey.”  Carol is the moderator of the Facebook support group “Women in Pain Awareness.” Her blog “The Pained Life” can be found here.

This column is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.