The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted existing weaknesses in the United States health care system, while creating a new set of challenges related to caring for people with serious illness. The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Roundtable on Quality Care for People with Serious Illness hosted a three-part workshop to explore the initial responses to the pandemic by health care teams providing care to people with serious illness, the impact of the pandemic on the health care workforce, the use of telehealth, issues related to clearly communicating with the public about health emergencies, and policy opportunities to improve care for people with serious illness. Issues related to health equity were discussed throughout the three webinars. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Advance Care Planning(ACP)has long been a staple of caring for people with serious illness. Over its history, it has been defined in different ways. Clinicians, researchers, patients, and the public have developed a variety of perspectives about the many aspects of ACP, ranging from the definition to the timing, goals, outcomes, and value of ACP. To better understand the challenges and opportunities for ACP, acknowledge and highlight divergent viewpoints, and examine what is empirically known and not known about ACP and its outcomes, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Roundtable on Quality Care for People with Serious Illness hosted a virtual public workshop, Advance Care Planning: Challenges and Opportunities, on October 26 and November 2, 2020. The workshop explored the paradox of ACP, its evidence base, ways to think differently about ACP, and various approaches to making it more effective.This Proceedings of a Workshop summarizes the presentations and discussions from that workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

The United States is facing an opioid use disorder epidemic with opioid overdoses killing 47,000 people in the U.S. in 2017. The past three decades have witnessed a significant increase in the prescribing of opioids for pain, based on the belief that patients were being undertreated for their pain, coupled with a widespread misunderstanding of the addictive properties of opioids. This increase in prescribing of opioids also saw a parallel increase in addiction and overdose. In an effort to address this ongoing epidemic of opioid misuse, policy and regulatory changes have been enacted that have served to limit the availability of prescription opioids for pain management. Overlooked amid the intense focus on efforts to end the opioid use disorder epidemic is the perspective of clinicians who are experiencing a significant amount of daily tension as opioid regulations and restrictions have limited their ability to treat the pain of their patients facing serious illness. Increased public and clinician scrutiny of opioid use has resulted in patients with serious illness facing stigma and other challenges when filling prescriptions for their pain medications or obtaining the prescription in the first place. Thus clinicians, patients, and their families are caught between the responses to the opioid use disorder epidemic and the need to manage pain related to serious illness. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine sponsored a workshop on November 29, 2018, to examine these unintended consequences of the responses to the opioid use disorder epidemic for patients, families, communities, and clinicians, and to consider potential policy opportunities to address them. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Author Laurene Graig analyzes the health care delivery systems in the United States, Canada, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom -- comparing and contrasting their health care systems with that of the United States. He makes expert and insightful assessments about what works . . . what doesn't work . . . and what promising new ideas are now being tested.

The third edition of Health of Nations is completely updated, including new information on developments in U.S. health care policy, incremental reform measures, and changes to the Medicare program. The growth and development of managed care, impact on the U.S. health care system, and the public backlash are also discussed.

The book is an excellent reference guide for students of international policy or anyone seeking information on U.S. health care reform.