NHS treatment poor compared to some overseas countries?

[PSEnny]

I’m on holiday with a family member who developed an infection. This is linked to an ongoing issue but no sign or symptoms of infection before we left. We’re in the Canary Islands. At 8.30 this morning we had to go to a local medical centre. Saw a doctor within minutes of arriving. 30 minutes later the issue had been diagnosed and an injection given which was a combination of antibiotics to kill the infection. Doctor also checked urine. Not by using a dipstick but by putting the sample in an analysis machine. This revealed an additional infection. Over the next 2 days relative needs to go back for daily injections of the antibiotics. We were fully expecting to be given some oral antibiotics (family member has been given these before when the same issue arose). NHS have never checked urine for a potential other infection. We asked the doctor why we hadn’t just been given oral antibiotics. Doctor discussed how the UK gets it wrong in a lot of its treatment, that the injections are the best course of treatment and that the go to over the counter antibiotics wouldn’t have got to the root of the problem. Doctor spent 30 minutes completing a full examination. In the UK you’re lucky to get 5 minutes with a GP. I’m guessing there’s a cost issue in that oral antibiotics are cheaper? And the additional time needed to do a thorough consultation is also costly but if it meant that issues were actually treated properly would this actually save money overall?
This isn’t to bash the NHS more a thought about why the best treatment isn’t offered and why thorough consultations aren’t carried out when other countries can do it?

I did not support PFI.
But under the Conservative government we have had naked corruption. All the PPE "made" by mates firms that did not meet standards and had to be burned. All the large contracts given to mates and then not properly delivered on. My DH works for a company that an NHS service has been outsourced to. He has been shocked at how poorly it is delivering and is looking to go back to the NHS.

Those asking Where does the money come from?

are you saying you accept the poor performance as the price for no one being asked to pay more ?

Or are you saying you can afford private so don't want to pay more to the general pot?

Or?

@LaCouleurDeMonCiel

The US system is VASTLY better than the NHS--don't believe everything the media tell you. Employers must offer health insurance to their employees and there are numerous public programs for the indigent, unemployed, between jobs, working poor, children who aren't in poverty but whose parents can't afford it, people over 65, etc. Half of all health care dollars are spent by insurance companies, and the other half is spent by the federal and state governments. We have a public-private system like most of the EU.

Healthcare here is among the best in the world. There is a reason that so many wealthy people fly in from overseas to get care here. My daughter is a doctor in a big city hospital and she treats rich people from the Middle East and homeless people off the street exactly the same. Doctors must treat to the "standard of care" for each particular condition, regardless of the person's insurance status. That status is a closely held secret anyway, so doctors don't know if their patients are publicly insured, privately insured, etc. It doesn't change the care.

Patients have a choice of doctors, hospitals, physical therapists, pharmacies, etc., so there is an element of competition that promotes excellence. Patients won't go to a dirty hospital or be treated by doctor/hospitals with low grades, which anyone can see online. My daughter is regularly graded by her patients and those grades can affect her pay, getting new jobs, etc., so doctors and medical facilities are highly focused on pleasing their patients and achieving good outcomes.

So the stories of people not being able to afford insulin or medical bankruptcy aren’t true?

nhs does intravenous antibiotics - you have to go to the ambulatory emergency care unit (AEC) or hospital day unit. Just because you haven’t had it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

Interesting. My family in Wisconsin and Minneapolis would disagree. They work for the government and their deductions per year are $10k for the family before insurance kicks in. Cousin’s inhalers (he’s 13) cost $600 every 3 months. Also, over medicated as the industry is run by pharmaceutical companies.

In Mexico it’s about £150 for a gp appointment and you are seen the same day. It’s mostly Americans because it’s cheaper over the boarder and there’s not a big queue because the vast majority can’t afford it. One of the best financial set ups for healthcare is Israel however they have other issues!

No system is perfect.

It's not what the media is telling me it's what the insulin dependent Diabetic people in the facebook group I'm in are telling, me they are worried their insurance will refuse to pay for all of their insulin or only pay for an inferior brand ,they say they are using out of date insulin because they are frightened not too
Are you saying they are lieing?
Why would they do that it's a private group not to do with politics etc.

@LifeExperience and if you don't have insurance?

Have a look at DrGlaukomflecken on Youtube. He's a consultant ophthalmologist who makes it clear how often his treatment decisions are overruled by unqualified administrators to save money.

Even worse, he is a lucky survivor of a cardiac arrest - his insurance company tried to avoid paying for his treatment as he got taken to an 'out of program' hospital to save his life. It was shocking how in his recovery he was having to fight his insurance company to pay for really basic treatment.

The care I recieved in the US was awful, gave me far far too much insulin and nearly killed me, incorrectly set a broken limb that had to be re-broken and operated on when I got home, prescribed me the wrong antibiotics after my blood cultures were grown meaning I developed life threatening sepsis, which they refused to treat because I already had antibiotics despite admitting they weren’t effective for my infection. They then said they would treat me if I settled my bill there and then, rather than them waiting for my insurance to settle my bill.

It is definitely true that in the US the quality of your medical care depends on the quality of your insurance.

My healthcare there was provided through 2 Health Maintenance Organisations, each centred around a major university medical centre. Both were superb, with much better treatment than the NHS offers. In America, land of free choice, the HMO option was considered less desirable by many because you had to choose GPs and specialists from the network and use the (amazing) university hospitals. As DH and I were both university employees, the cost was nominal.

Both HMOs also treated a number of patients on both Medicaid (for the poor) and Medicare (the very good public option for the over 65s who have made sufficient contributions). Not all health systems are happy with these public patients, which is simply wrong IMO

Several friends needed out of network emergency treatment. This was provided by contract. One had to be airlifted home from Eastern Europe. I know he was happily surprised at how easy the financial side was.

The moral is that America leaves far too much to luck; it is immoral. A good HMO is much better than the NHS. (I write as someone who credits the NHS for saving the life of DH. I do not think they could move quickly enough against his aggressive cancer to do the same today) A bad one can be a logistical nightmare. Private insurance can be good or horrible. Medicare and to a lesser extent Medicaid work pretty well once you are plugged in to the system, but making connections can be a nightmare.

I think it is mostly the uninsured who are bankrupted by medical costs, but I am not sure. In any case it should not happen in a civilised society.

TL;DR American health care is a story of extremes, and it is not just about what you are paying. The best is much better than the NHS. The worst has no place in civilised society

Did you actually read the OP? The presenting problem (for which the iv antibiotics were rescribed) was not a UTI - the UTI was an incidental finding. Perhaps check your facts before accusing someone of fraud?

Clinical treatment is often dangerously inadequate. have you seen the latest statistics saying more than half of maternity services are inadequate? The inevitable effect of under staffing and cost cutting. People are dying waiting for ambulances/GP appintments/cancer care. That does not equate to good clinical treatment.

My mother was shocked at the lack of checks for my Aunt who lives in the US and has diabetes. No retina checks, no cholesterol lowing drugs or foot care is paid for by her insurance, just the basic insulin.

Yeah I don't doubt anything you are saying
And I'm fully aware of the issues the NHS has, but I will take that over worrying about how to pay for my sons insulin of ,or worrying he hasn't got enough
Its scary some of the things i read on the diabetes Facebook group I'm on .

Won’t the doctor have been doing a wet slide/ urine microscopy…..dipsticks are bad for detecting all infections.

They also say the uti is additional to the infection being treated.

Yep and insurance suddenly stopping the use of biologics that patients have waited ages for and finally found one that works etc.

In the facebook group for my medical condition, over treatment in the US seems common. Very regular MRIs although there is no need for them. Alongside that people in the US who can't see a specialist and are having to make do with a Dr who does not understand their condition.