Background:
In May 2000, JACK M. SHAPIRO HEALTHCARE MARKETING RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT CONSULTING, INC. , completed in-depth interviews with 100 consumers around the United States regarding their views about the future of healthcare. Selected issues were researched which had previously surfaced on the national healthcare radio show, "MediPolitics," from 1997 through 1999. That show had been hosted by Jack Shapiro.

Topics which emerged on the show lent themselves to four very broad areas: the public's current mood about healthcare as we enter the 21st Century; some ethical dilemmas regarding difficult future tradeoffs involving access to care vs. healthcare benefits and cost of care; the likelihood of ever seeing single-payer healthcare in the United States (and the practical obstacles to this); and the worrisome and ever-obvious healthcare political leadership vacuum.

It became obvious that a survey of consumer opinion would be beneficial in helping to quantify the many issues which arose from the radio show. The findings have also served as the basis for many keynote speeches given by Mr. Shapiro on the topic of the future of healthcare. In addition, these findings will be included in Mr. Shapiro's forthcoming book: "A DEATH IN THE CITY: QUESTIONING THE FUTURE OF AMERICAN HEALTHCARE."

Sample/Methodology:
From February - early May 2000, 100 consumers were interviewed by telephone in a carefully stratified sample designed to gather opinions from respondents in every state in the country. One method of drawing sample was to utilize US Census Bureau Regions defined as: Northeast: (Maine through Pennsylvania); South (Delaware through Florida and west to Texas and Oklahoma and north to the border states); Midwest (Ohio through the plains states of North and South Dakota, Kansas and Nebraska); and the West which included all remaining states west of the plains states.

Consumers were drawn at random. Each interview lasted approximately twenty minutes. The cost of this research study was borne by the Shapiro organization. Funding from outside sources was neither sought nor received.

SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

As we enter the 21st Century, the American public's mood about healthcare is decidedly quite mixed. Overall the public is pleased about a number of things: they generally perceive themselves to be quite healthy; most are satisfied with their health insurance benefits and are pleased with their choice of carrier; they are taking advantage of various alternatives to gain access to healthcare; there is widespread satisfaction with the current level of spending on healthcare research and development; and consumers look forward to the benefits of the biotech revolution.

On the other hand, there is almost universal agreement that healthcare costs are rising too rapidly and the public ascribes blame to many factors; there is concern as to whether Medicare will remain solvent during their lifetimes and what will happen to their Medicare benefits; and there is universal concern about the growing number of people without healthcare insurance.

Our survey also examined four ethical dilemmas and found the public to be sharply divided on most of these issues:

How far does the public expect the healthcare system to go in saving their own lives?

How far does the public expect the healthcare system to go in saving the lives of someone they love?

How willing is the public to accept fewer medical benefits so that more people can obtain minimal coverage?

How willing is the public to tradeoff healthcare benefits for access to care?

Perhaps the most interesting finding to arise from a study of these types of issues was that the public appears to cherish their access to physicians and hospitals of their choice above all else in healthcare. They appear to be ready in large numbers to trade-away medical benefits in order to guarantee choice. The public is also becoming more cognizant of the need to try to find ways to lower skyrocketing healthcare costs.

Given that the public may be willing to make some tradeoffs, are they also willing to take a major step in the future and move towards a single-payer healthcare system?

While almost no one in this survey expects to see government-funded single-payer healthcare in the United States any time soon, a slim majority (51%) now favors the general idea of such a system. Another one-fifth of the public is "neutral" towards the single-payer concept ("neither favor nor disfavor it"), while only one-fourth "disfavors" or "strongly disfavors" it.

Government-funded single-payer healthcare was defined as "government pays the bills but leaves healthcare choices in the private sector." This differs from "single-provider" healthcare where the "government pays for healthcare and provides it as well." A clear majority of respondents (61%) did not favor the idea of single-provider healthcare.

Despite extremely low ratings for leadership on healthcare by government at all levels, two-fifths of Americans (40%) indicated that healthcare will be one of the deciding issues in their choice for President in the 2000 election - a substantial segment of society that could affect the final outcome of the race and possibly future Presidential contests as the decade unfolds and the nation moves closer to 2011 when Baby Boomers will begin to flood the Medicare system. Only 19% indicated that healthcare would not be a deciding issue and another 40% said "maybe" to this question.

Other issues explored in this study included: the public's lack of personal knowledge about healthcare; how consumers are taking advantage of ways to access healthcare/healthcare knowledge; concern about Medicare solvency and benefits; Canadian and British healthcare systems as models for the US; attitudes towards pending healthcare legislation; whether the federal budget surplus is credible to the public and, if so, what to do with it.

Please contact us at jack@jackshapiro.com for information as to how you can order a copy of this groundbreaking public opinion survey.

next page | home