Introduction
Regulation bodies have been put in place to establish the minimal acceptable standards that will govern the medical insurance industry. This is important in safeguarding the interest of both the service providers and the people seeking the services. This standards are expected to be improved taking into consideration the needs of the residents and the level of satisfaction. The access to the health care across the different countries varies depending on the economic and social conditions and also the health policies that have been put in place in that particular country (DeNavas-Walt, 2010). Systems in health care are established in order to meet the health care goals in the specific societies. Different policies have made it possible for individuals to compare the health insurance status in the different states. In this particular article we will dwell on the health insurance status of Kansas and Kentucky states.
Health insurance in Kansas and Kentucky
Kansas seems to have most people with health insurance coverage as compared to Kentucky. This evident since of all Kansas residents over 87% are covered with a health insurance plan, more than 12% lack health insurance cover ad this number keeps on rising (Jones, Bradley & Oberlander, 2014). Despite there being a good number of people who are covered the remaining number still has to be taken care of. It is thus important for the bodies responsible to ensure that all residents are covered so that they can receive health services easily (DeNavas-Walt, 2010).
In Kentucky however, the situation is a bit different with most people lacking the health insurance cover. Almost 15 people out of 100 lack the coverage making it a bigger number (DeNavas-Walt, 2010). The residents from this state are yet to embrace insurance fully hence the need for more sensitization. When there is economic uncertainty it is risky to stay without an insurance cover, this is exposing one to risk that may lead to adverse effect of their health status (Jones, Bradley & Oberlander, 2014). It is evident that if action is not taken early enough in Kansas the results might be detrimental. This is because the number of uninsured keeps on rising hence the need for current plans and policies to be implemented.
In both states employers offer health benefits to their employees, however in Kansas the number is decreasing which is alarming. The insurance commissioner has to review the policies and plans currently in place to ensure that the number does not go on decreasing and that the cover is accessible to most residents. Taking advantage of the cover offered by the employers is the best way to obtain the coverage (DeNavas-Walt, 2010). The employees enjoy the benefit at no cost at all or at a reduced cost. It is a cheaper and easier way of having an insurance cover. This has also been used by employers as a way of motivating them and enabling them have a conducive working environment in order to increase productivity. Both countries are using this as a way of getting most residents to access healthcare.
Accessibility of health plans is better in Kansas as compared to Kentucky. In Kansas for every 1000 residents there is one physician while in Kentucky there is barely even one physician for every 1000 residents (Cimasi, 2005). This endangers the lives of Kentucky people on accessibility to health care. The condition in Kansas in good since a bigger percentage of the population could get access to health care. Despite this more can be done to make the situation even better. The percentage of residents who can access health care in Kentucky is relatively low. The number of people likely not to be able to access health care keeps on increasing which is even more alarming. A lot need to be done in Kentucky with especially the review of its plans and policies and the centers need a lot of encouragement (Jones, Bradley & Oberlander, 2014).
General health statistics of the population as well as the state health ranking in Kansas and Kentucky
Kansas overall health is above the national average slightly while that of Kentucky is below average. However, the efforts by Kentucky to improve the general healthiness of the residents has been bearing fruits. With the efforts actually translating to improved health status of the residents in health coverage. Kansas is the 22nd healthiest state in the United States of America while Kentucky is ranked among the worst state but currently it has improved to the 37th position (Jones, Bradley & Oberlander, 2014). Comparing the two Kansas is doing much better in terms health insurance coverage for its residents as compared to Kentucky.
Kansas dropped in its ranking despite being the best while Kentucky is improving. One of the challenges that the residents of Kansas are facing when it comes to their health is funding of public health, the country need to improve its current status. The boom in Kentucky is attributed to the rise of public health funding per capita (DeNavas-Walt, 2010). The extra funding has come a long way in helping the state improve on important sectors in its health status.
The position on healthcare reform that Kansas and Kentucky adopt
Kansas in order to improve its health status has to start concentrating on important issues, and improve of the plans it has on health insurance to ensure residents can access it. In Kentucky it is prudent to ensure that health insurance coverage if affordable and accessible for the residents. This will ensure that they keep on improving from the current state to become a better country if they continue with the hard work.
Influence of the healthcare reform on professional nursing practice of the two states
The influence of the healthcare reform on professional nursing is similar in the two states in that nurses have to shift their concentration on not only offering better services but ensuring that the reforms are implemented. It is important that training takes place in an effort to align the nurses’ duties to the direction the reforms are taking (Jones, Bradley & Oberlander, 2014). The reforms are meant to improve the overall performance of the health sector and in turn the insurance coverage and for this to take place nurses play a very critical role. This clearly shows that their practice will be highly influenced to yield positive results. In terms of aligning the duties towards ensuring that the reforms are implemented successfully (Lundy, & Janes, 2001).
The difference is brought about by the state of affairs of the two States; Kansas is on a fairly better position while Kentucky is struggling to improve its state of affairs in healthiness. The nursing practice will be influenced differently due to the different levels. Professional nurses in Kentucky have a lot to adjust and to change in order to ensure that the reforms are implemented in good time. Kansas nurses just have to improve on what they are already doing and support the government in ensuring that the health status improves.
Conclusion
The state of health insurance coverage between the two states is very different, with each falling of different sided of the coin. However, each state is taking steps in trying to improve its current situation; it will take time and great effort for them to get to where they want to be in regards to the health status (Jones, Bradley & Oberlander, 2014). The government has to play a big role to utilize its resources and funding to Kentucky as its current state is very bad. For it reach the level that Kansas is in a lot has to be done and this means that much concentration should be put on the latter. This will ensure that they improve to the same level, making the residents of both states receive quality healthcare (Lundy, & Janes, 2001).
References
Cimasi, R. J. (2005). The U.S. healthcare certificate of need sourcebook. Washington, D.C: Beard Books.
DeNavas-Walt, C. (2010). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States (2005). DIANE Publishing.
Jones, D. K., Bradley, K. W., & Oberlander, J. (2014). Pascal's Wager: health insurance exchanges, Obamacare, and the Republican dilemma. Journal of health politics, policy and law, 39(1), 97-137.
Lundy, K. S., &Janes, S. (2001). Community health nursing: Caring for the public's health. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
