Obama's diagnosis for health reform would cut costs by rewarding quality care and limiting unnecessary treatments. But one man's economies are another's lost profits. Full Story »
Posted by Judy Plapinger
A great story pointing out some of the cost saving measures that can be implemented now with little or no negative effect on quality and effectiveness of care. The story is a good introduction to evidence-based medicine and the savings it allows.
But even if such a panel focused on clinical effectiveness rather than cost-effectiveness — so that taxpayers would cover vastly more expensive approaches as long as they were slightly more effective — the shift would still be dramatic for Medicare, which currently covers just about any possibly effective treatment with virtually no regard for cost. If Medicare takes the lead in reform, private insurers should follow. This would probably qualify as “rationing,” but anyone who’s ever had an insurer refuse to pay for something knows that health care is already rationed, in the sense that you can’t always get everything you want.
Excellent insight. It’s articles like these that are helping change my opinions on government provided healthcare
Reforms like the ones in this article are necessary regardless of the outcome of the current healthcare debate. The fact is that some areas pay less than half of others for more effective care. Identifying the factors that increase effectiveness and applying them nationwide is going to be imperative to controlling future healtcare costs. The sad fact, however, is that a cultural change is needed in our hyper-litigious society as well as in many doctors' view that medicine is a business with the aim of making money.