Introduction
It is important to note that while the quality of healthcare service is critical, its accessibility is as relevant. Therefore, the emphasis of the paper will be put on addressing and assessing the problem of interest by analyzing its critical elements, considering and studying various solutions alongside their ethical implications and implementations. The given analysis will primarily focus on geographic and related factors in regards to the issue of healthcare access.
Elements of the Issue
The central aspect of the problem of accessibility of healthcare revolves around the fact that the large segments of the population are unable to easily access the services of the healthcare system due to key socioeconomic, demographic, and location-based factors. The first major step is an identification of the issue at hand, which is the lack of accessibility of healthcare to certain groups based on their geographic elements. The second important stage is a generation of potential solutions to the inaccessibility of healthcare. These can be manifested in higher governmental integration, more involved healthcare market regulation, increasing the workforce in the medical field, aid and support to vulnerable groups, and improving the overall infrastructure to ensure that channels of accessibility are put in place.
The third step is an evaluation of the proposed solutions, where there is an evident indication that all these solutions require some degree of increased government support. The fourth step is rooted in the actual implementation of the decisions, which need to begin with attempts to increase the general public awareness, demand required changes from the government, and develop financially sound plans to fund these programs and aids.
Analysis
One should be aware that there is a wide range of critical factors, which impact the accessibility of health on differential levels. According to a study on the issue, it is stated that “government and insurance policy, health organization and operations influence, stigma, and primary care and specialist influence” are newly emerging aspects of healthcare accessibility problem alongside the well-known accommodation and availability elements (Cyr et al., 2019, p. 1). The presented evidence is a credible one due to the source of data being from major medical and public institutions and findings being based on a large pool of information from nationwide assessments. The relevance is primarily rooted in the notion of the data being focused on the US with no specific focus on a particular state. It is also a recent publication from the pre-COVID period, which most likely worsened the situation due to heavy overload on the healthcare sector.
In addition, geographic elements in regards to the accessibility of healthcare in the US can also be more prominent in certain regions more than in others. For instance, a study conducted on Hispanic and Latino immigrants is indicative of the fact that “physical location, socioeconomic factors, distance, and transportation served as barriers to accessing healthcare services” (Edward & Biddle, 2016, p. 297). The research is a credible one due to its large sample size, and it is also relevant due to the precise focus on cultural and racial factors, which directly impact the geographic-related accessibility elements.
Considering Options
The potential interventions for the problem of accessibility of healthcare and its key services can take many forms. However, the options mainly revolve around an increased governmental intervention and improvement of healthcare service provision channels, which, in turn, can also depend on the former. The channel improvement options might manifest themselves in in-home healthcare services, telemedicine, or online healthcare information source improvements. In addition, the programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, can be expanded to encompass and cover a larger pool of vulnerable groups, such as members of minority groups, people with low socioeconomic status, and communities living in geographically disadvantaged regions, such as immigrant of the southern United States.
In the majority of the proposed solutions, a governmental intervention will be needed, but the consequences of ignoring the issue are more detrimental to the public health of the nation. For example, creating more platforms for easy-to-access and accurate information on health can be a major improvement in combatting misinformation issues, such as anti-vax groups. However, despite these pros, the major con of such an approach is funding from the government, which will put an economic and financial strain on the general public and might become highly politicized.
Solution
The selected solution is based on a combinatory plan, where the more available and plausible options are prioritized before more drastic ones. These are healthcare service channel improvements through online information, telemedicine, and in-home healthcare provision, which do not require heavy governmental involvement besides regulatory and legislative aspects. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to ensure variability in engagement and access to the essential services through these channels (Doblecki-Lewis et al., 2017). In other words, these measures can increase accessibility without the use of extensive resources.
Ethical Implications
To properly comprehend and understand the highly intricate elements of the problem, one should be willing to factor in ethical implications, which also impact the approaches aimed at addressing the issue of healthcare accessibility. For example, the provision of an improved access channel to a particular healthcare issue or a vulnerable group can be viewed as a sign of social inequality, such as utilizing programs for individuals with HIV in a specific region (Doblecki-Lewis et al., 2017). The proposed solution’s pro, from the ethical point of view, is that it eliminates the heavy political and institutional polarization of the problem since the channel improvements can be made within the private healthcare industry through enforcement of the incentive-based legislation. However, it can also result in some form of slowness in reacting to the needs of the most vulnerable groups, such as people living in geographically disadvantaged locations.
Implementation
The overall implementation is centered on the use of current healthcare infrastructure and systems of service provision through enforcement of expansion of the reach of the channels. The plan can include mandating the enhancement of the telemedicine sector of the sphere of healthcare. In addition, in-home healthcare services can become a more dominant element of healthcare facilities since early interventions are not as dependent on in-patient measures as more complicated problems.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the current state of the healthcare system in the United States is a prime example of how highly privatized, and advanced healthcare can be out of reach for a significant portion of the nation’s population. The factor of accessibility can be manifested in a wide variety of matters, which can range from provider availability, mobility, and transportation to geographic locations. In addition, the given issue can differentially affect certain groups of the population, such as ethnic or racial ones.
References
Cyr, M. E., Etchin, A. G., Guthrie, B. J., & Benneyan, J. C. (2019). Access to specialty healthcare in urban versus rural US populations: A systematic literature review. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 1-17.
Doblecki-Lewis, S., Liu, A., Feaster, D., Cohen, S. E., Cardenas, G., Bacon, O., Andrew, E., & Kolber, M. A. (2017). Healthcare access and PrEP continuation in San Francisco and Miami after the US PrEP Demo Project. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 74(5), 531–538.
Edward, J., & Biddle, D. J. (2016). Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to examine barriers to healthcare access for Hispanic and Latino immigrants in the U.S. South. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 4(2), 297–307.