Background: Craniosynostoses are congenital defects in the construction of the skull involving premature fusion of one or more cranial sutures. Premature fusion of sutures causes characteristic skull deformation(s). This affect the structure and thus the appearance of the entire head and face. The aim of this study was to analyze parents’ subjective assessments of head and facial appearance in children with craniosynostoses before and after surgery. Parents also assessed the interpersonal relationship of their children with peers and adults (after surgery). Methods: This study was conducted among parents of 230 children treated in Poland, in two multidisciplinary centers. Detailed statistical analysis was conducted among children who had undergone surgery. Independent variables were age (at survey) of the child (three years and less, four years, and five years and more) and type of craniosynostosis (isolated and syndromic). A chi-square independence test was used. Data was collected using surveys. Results: In the opinion of most parents, the appearance of their child’s head and face after surgery did not differ or differed only slightly from that of their peers. The results of subjective assessment of appearance of children’s face and head after reconstructive treatment remains comparable in three subgroups of patients according to the age. It seems that specific head shape according to the type of craniosynostosis does not have an impact on relations with peers and adults. Conclusion: Surgical treatment of children with craniosynostoses improves the appearance of their head and face. This improvement seems not to depend on the type of isolated craniosynostosis, and is constant over time. Full article
Thanks for the post. My wife and I have achieved FI and are exploring when we can retire (she is only working part time now). My biggest challenge is that I have a chronic leukemia that requires medication for life (fortunately I am in remission but still need to take medicine daily). What surprised me the most when searching for health plans on the exchanges, was the lack of hospitals and doctors in the plans. I live in Houston and none of the major hospitals in the medical center are in the market place plans. So if I quit my job I would loose access to the specialist that I have seen for almost 7 years now. I’ve thought of moving to a different state where the plans have access to specific local specialists (of course who knows if the plans in other states will eventually drop those doctors). But for now I feel a bit stuck in my job if I want to visit the doctor and have access to the medical facility that I am so familiar and comfortable with.
Obamacare had what it known as the 80/20 rule, which meant health insurance companies were required to have an MLR score of at least 80%. For health insurance companies offering group large group coverage (usually to 50 or more people), that minimum score jumped to 85%. The new CMS rule is going to loosen the Obama era MLR regulations, helping “ease the burden” for health insurance companies. This would allow more companies to enter the marketplace, and create more competition in an attempt to drive down costs.
Your comment makes sense for fatFIRE types absolutely. However, my experience is that you can more routinely expect health issues to arise the older you (and your kids) get. I.e., don’t look back on your health utilization rate in your 30s and 40s when your kids are under 13 or so, and expect it will continue at that same rate from there! The previous year we met the deductible and out of pocket for my husband’s spinal fusion for accumulated wear and tear from climbing, biking, etc. (he’s in his 50s). So CAT health coverage is a gamble, and the advantage is going to go to the house at some point!
A high deductible health insurance plan has higher deductibles and lower premiums than most other health insurance plans. This means you pay a smaller fixed amount every month, but it will take a longer time for insurance to kick in and begin cost-sharing (meaning you will pay your percentage of coinsurance for every bill). You might benefit from this plan if you don’t require many doctor’s visits or other healthcare benefits. Look at quotes for high deductible health insurance plans to figure out if this plan is right for you.
The private health system in Australia operates on a "community rating" basis, whereby premiums do not vary solely because of a person's previous medical history, current state of health, or (generally speaking) their age (but see Lifetime Health Cover below). Balancing this are waiting periods, in particular for pre-existing conditions (usually referred to within the industry as PEA, which stands for "pre-existing ailment"). Funds are entitled to impose a waiting period of up to 12 months on benefits for any medical condition the signs and symptoms of which existed during the six months ending on the day the person first took out insurance. They are also entitled to impose a 12-month waiting period for benefits for treatment relating to an obstetric condition, and a 2-month waiting period for all other benefits when a person first takes out private insurance. Funds have the discretion to reduce or remove such waiting periods in individual cases. They are also free not to impose them to begin with, but this would place such a fund at risk of "adverse selection", attracting a disproportionate number of members from other funds, or from the pool of intending members who might otherwise have joined other funds. It would also attract people with existing medical conditions, who might not otherwise have taken out insurance at all because of the denial of benefits for 12 months due to the PEA Rule. The benefits paid out for these conditions would create pressure on premiums for all the fund's members, causing some to drop their membership, which would lead to further rises in premiums, and a vicious cycle of higher premiums-leaving members would ensue.
The first government responsibility is the fixing of the rate at which medical expenses should be negotiated, and it does so in two ways: The Ministry of Health directly negotiates prices of medicine with the manufacturers, based on the average price of sale observed in neighboring countries. A board of doctors and experts decides if the medicine provides a valuable enough medical benefit to be reimbursed (note that most medicine is reimbursed, including homeopathy). In parallel, the government fixes the reimbursement rate for medical services: this means that a doctor is free to charge the fee that he wishes for a consultation or an examination, but the social security system will only reimburse it at a pre-set rate. These tariffs are set annually through negotiation with doctors' representative organisations.
Recently (2009) the main representative body of British Medical physicians, the British Medical Association, adopted a policy statement expressing concerns about developments in the health insurance market in the UK. In its Annual Representative Meeting which had been agreed earlier by the Consultants Policy Group (i.e. Senior physicians) stating that the BMA was "extremely concerned that the policies of some private healthcare insurance companies are preventing or restricting patients exercising choice about (i) the consultants who treat them; (ii) the hospital at which they are treated; (iii) making top up payments to cover any gap between the funding provided by their insurance company and the cost of their chosen private treatment." It went in to "call on the BMA to publicise these concerns so that patients are fully informed when making choices about private healthcare insurance." The practice of insurance companies deciding which consultant a patient may see as opposed to GPs or patients is referred to as Open Referral. The NHS offers patients a choice of hospitals and consultants and does not charge for its services.
The insured person has full freedom of choice among the approximately 60 recognised healthcare providers competent to treat their condition (in their region) on the understanding that the costs are covered by the insurance up to the level of the official tariff. There is freedom of choice when selecting an insurance company to which one pays a premium, usually on a monthly basis. The insured person pays the insurance premium for the basic plan up to 8% of their personal income. If a premium is higher than this, the government gives the insured person a cash subsidy to pay for any additional premium.
The Administration's new rules allow short-term policies to last longer and be renewable, and allow self-employed people to purchase coverage under association health plans. In both cases, the idea is that those alternatives have lower premiums (because they don't cover as much and are subject to fewer regulations), and are thus more appealing to healthy people, particularly if they don't qualify for premium subsidies in their state's health insurance exchange.
Primary care refers to the work of health professionals who act as a first point of consultation for all patients within the health care system. Such a professional would usually be a primary care physician, such as a general practitioner or family physician. Another professional would be a licensed independent practitioner such as a physiotherapist, or a non-physician primary care provider such as a physician assistant or nurse practitioner. Depending on the locality, health system organization the patient may see another health care professional first, such as a pharmacist or nurse. Depending on the nature of the health condition, patients may be referred for secondary or tertiary care.
But on the other hand, people who do that may find themselves between a rock and a hard place if they do end up getting seriously injured or ill, as there are numerous drawbacks to the less-regulated plans. In particular, the ACA's essential health benefits don't have to be covered, which means there could be gaping holes in the coverage (things like prescription drugs, maternity care, mental health care, etc. might not be covered at all, depending on the plan).
This year’s enrollment period offers good news to many Americans. After two years of carriers leaving markets and steep rate increases, states are seeing carriers re-enter exchanges for 2019 – and average rate increases are smaller than they were in 2017 and 2018. And, although premium subsidies will be slightly decreased in 2019 (though not in all states), those eligible for cost-sharing reductions will continue to receive them.