Right now, the American health care system spends too much on the wrong things for too few people. This status quo is getting very, very expensive.
Forty six million Americans are going without health insurance. Doctors and hospitals spend too much on expensive last-minute care and far too little on preventative care. Disorderly record keeping and a shortage of primary care physicians add billions of dollars in unnecessary coordination and administrative costs. Health care costs burden American companies with a competitive disadvantage, and workers suffer as employers slash benefits to stay afloat.
Here’s what the status quo is costing Americans:
–$1,502 in higher annual premiums by 2010 for a family health insurance policy from unpaid care for the uninsured
–$220 per taxpayer to pay for the government’s share of uncompensated care to the uninsured
–$700 billion per year, $2,300 per person, in unnecessary care
–$2,000 in health care costs for every GM car
–$3,400 per taxpayer to cover chronic conditions under Medicare and Medicaid. The cost and incidence of chronic conditions could be radically curtailed by targeted investments in prevention and primary care physicians.
Now is time for health care reform, which would universalize affordable and accessible coverage, encourage primary care physicians and outcomes-based compensation, and invest in electronic record keeping, prevention and chronic care to reduce long term costs.


All too true.
The challenges are two-fold. First, should cost control or access expansion be the first priority? Or should they (can they) both be done at the same time?
And second, once what should be done is agreed to, then the bigger challenge is how to implement those changes so that they are productive and effective. By this I don’t mean what should the legislation say, or how could it get enough votes to become law, but rather, how would initiatives and changes included in new Federal law, (and changes to existing Federal programs), actually be implemented/adopted in both the health care financing and delivery system - with the delivery system being a much harder entity to shift in its operations. (A comparison might be that if changing the direction of the financing system is like changing the course of an aircraft carrier, then changing the direction of the delivery system is like changing the obit of a moon or a comet.)
Let’s hope that all these steps can be undertaken swiftly to improve both clinical and economic outcomes for patients and our entire society.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:36 pmWe can control costs by improving access at the same time. This is because restricting access shifts costs to the emergency room where they are much more expensive.
Obama clearly set forth the most efficient way to implement the changes in the debates, which is about the same as page 154 of Tom Daschle’s book, “Critical,” published this year.
December 2nd, 2008 at 2:06 pm