As far as I know it's not. Here are two pieces of anecdotal evidence:
- cycle responders in London [1]. I can't see how private companies can get enough "client density" to afford the fleet in a congested city centre to reduce response time. Moreover, centralized dispatch is inherently more efficient.
- centralized and somewhat open control of life-saving procedures' efficiency [2][3]. In this particular case it's children heart surgery. NHS not only applied country-wide risk-adjusted statistical model, they also did a project to communicate it to patients. I'm not sure if it's possible in the US healthcare system.
From the POV of a recent immigrant it looks like most dissatisfaction with NHS stems from their approach to mundane and/or chronic problems, that's where you see GP resistance and long waiting times. They seem very good at not letting people die. Arguably it's a reasonable tradeoff given their constrained resources.
- cycle responders in London [1]. I can't see how private companies can get enough "client density" to afford the fleet in a congested city centre to reduce response time. Moreover, centralized dispatch is inherently more efficient.
- centralized and somewhat open control of life-saving procedures' efficiency [2][3]. In this particular case it's children heart surgery. NHS not only applied country-wide risk-adjusted statistical model, they also did a project to communicate it to patients. I'm not sure if it's possible in the US healthcare system.
From the POV of a recent immigrant it looks like most dissatisfaction with NHS stems from their approach to mundane and/or chronic problems, that's where you see GP resistance and long waiting times. They seem very good at not letting people die. Arguably it's a reasonable tradeoff given their constrained resources.
[1]: http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/calling_999/who_will_treat...
[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NebRpbMTK8
[3]: http://childrensheartsurgery.info/