April 9, 2009
Universal health care may kill you
In Wednesday's Opinion Journal there's an article by two practicing medical doctors who are on the faculty of the Harvard Medical School. Their concern is that efforts ostensibly geared toward improving the quality of medical care in the U.S. are also likely to inject a life-threatening rigidity into patient treatment protocols. Drs. Jerome Groopman and Pamela Hartzband take issue with how...
Health-policy planners define quality as clinical practice that conforms to consensus guidelines written by experts. The guidelines present specific metrics for physicians to meet, thus "quality metrics." Since 2003, the federal government has piloted Medicare projects at more than 260 hospitals to reward physicians and institutions that meet quality metrics. The program is called "pay-for-performance."
What kind of "specific metrics" are of concern here?
One key quality measure in the ICU became the level of blood sugar in critically ill patients. Expert panels reviewed data on whether ICU patients should have insulin therapy adjusted to tightly control their blood sugar, keeping it within the normal range, or whether a more flexible approach, allowing some elevation of sugar, was permissible. Expert consensus endorsed tight control, and this approach was embedded in guidelines from the American Diabetes Association.
And thus was born what has become a standard, acceptable and "quality metric" clinical practice. But just how much good did this do the patients upon whom such quality of care was imposed? Well, last month the New England Journal of Medicine published the results of a randomized study of more than 6,000 critically ill ICU patients that was conducted in Australia, New Zeeland and Canada. Guess what? More patients died in the tightly regulated group than those cared for with the flexible protocol.
Other studies involving this and other "quality metric" protocols have yielded similar results. That is, Medicare and private insurers demanding that physicians follow rigid and inflexible treatment practices is not always best for the patient. In fact, one such study was discontinued 17 months short of its scheduled completion because of the high numbers of patients on a rigid blood sugar control regimen who were dying.
Keep in mind that fifty cents or more of every health care dollar spent in the U.S. already comes from or through a national, state or local agency. The other half seems well on its way to falling under government jurisdiction. But, government agencies are best at conjuring up, writing, implementing and insisting that everyone follow procedures. As a result, with universal, government-funded health care - even if there are some private care options - relying on an attending physician's Judgment will probably be of ever diminishing importance. Big Brother will have already made all the important decisions.
Including, I suppose, who lives and who dies.
To comment on this or any other American Thinker article or blog, you must be a subscriber to our ad-free service. Login to your subscription to access the comments section. You can subscribe on a monthly basis for $6.79 a month or for a year at $69.99
Login
Subscribe / Change PwdAd Free / Commenting Login
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Antisemitism in the Guise of Humanism
- Escaping the State of Sin
- Outsquatting the Squatters
- From Illegal Alien Invaders to Newcomers to Democrats
- The Impact of China-Linked Contractors on U.S. Security
- Debunking the Stupid, Yet Passionately Held, Myths About the 1994 Crime Bill
- The Death of the American Salesman
- The Alarm Bell Is Clanging
- Voting and the Meaning of Honor
- Exploding The Myth That Islam Is An Abrahamic Religion
Blog Posts
- So was Hunter Biden 'Our Man in Ukraine'?
- The suspect who smashed Kaylee Gain’s head into the pavement claims she’s the victim
- About those innocent Palestinian civilians...
- The GOP seems to be on the verge of capitulating before the Democrats, again!
- Biden and the insurmountable
- Universe twice as old as we’ve been told?
- Ketanji Brown Jackson is a fascist who should be removed from the Court
- Can Letitia James handle the rough world of property management?
- It’s time to stop accommodating the crazies in America
- The value of perspective
- And then they voted Democrat in November
- Trump towers in his mastery of words to rally voters
- Planet Fitness loses $400 million in value after banning woman who exposed the company’s anti-female stance
- Schadenfreude: New movie labeling white people ‘dangerous animals’ flops at box office
- Why are American youths so unhappy?