Category Archives: Health Economics

Scams in Healthcare– a problem with capitalism?

It’s not enough that we allow drug companies to take advantage of their patent protection and overcharge, but we also have to deal with ye olde American revenue generating scams.  Unfortunately it seems to be in the American character to take advantage of non-regulation.  So drug companies without the restraint of negotiating prices with Medicare up the prices yearly without good reason, save their desire to maximize prices.  We, the U.S. pay more for drugs than any other country in the world.  Perfectly legal but very costly.

Similarly without regulation and oversight scams in Medicare occur.….

The wheelchair scam was designed to exploit blind spots in Medicare, which often pays insurance claims without checking them first. Criminals disguised themselves as medical-supply companies. They ginned up bogus bills, saying they’d provided expensive wheelchairs to Medicare patients — who, in reality, didn’t need wheelchairs at all. Then the scammers asked Medicare to pay them back, so they could pocket the huge markup that the government paid on each chair.

A lot of the time, Medicare was fooled. The government paid.

Since 1999, Medicare has spent $8.2 billion to procure power wheelchairs and “scooters” for 2.7 million people. Today, the government cannot even guess at how much of that money was paid out to scammers.

Read the article for full details.

Medicynical Note:  Who is to blame?  The scammers? or the regulators (and lack thereof) or perish the thought the patients ?  All to some degree.

We have a political party dedicated to decreasing regulation, still think that’s a good idea?  Perhaps the solution is to become libertarians and do away with  government intervention, including Medicare, Medicaid and all government medical programs including licensing, drug testing and development, patents, etc and let everyone compete.  A few people may die, collateral damage to our quest for deregulation, because they can’t afford care but perhaps the change will encourage honesty and truth through the “music” of the marketplace?  Or do we have a problem that money makes people do funny (not ha ha) things?

US Healthcare vs the World: It Ain’t Pretty

The Commonwealth Fund compares the non-system of healthcare in the U.S. with 11 other industrialized nations.  How do we rank?

The United States health care system is the most expensive in the world, but this report and prior editions consistently show the U.S. under performs relative to other countries on most dimensions of performance. Among the 11 nations studied in this report—Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States—the U.S. ranks last, as it did in the 2010, 2007, 2006, and 2004 editions of Mirror, Mirror. Most troubling, the U.S. fails to achieve better health outcomes than the other countries, and as shown in the earlier editions, the U.S. is last or near last on dimensions of access, efficiency, and equity. In this edition of Mirror, Mirror, the United Kingdom ranks first, followed closely by Switzerland

More here.

Medicynical Note:  Nothing new here, the weakness of money driven health care has been evident for years.  Our emphasis is on profits and revenue.  Healthcare?  Not the main concern of providers (the more you do the more you earn), suppliers, insurers and drug companies.  How else to explain our costs and problematic delivery of care.  Whether the Affordable Care Act will change this remains to be seen.  Sobering, but for the U.S. BUSINESS as usual.  Read the links for more information.

 

We Pay More for Health Care. Period.

Read this and weep.  We pay more for almost everything; have no better outcomes; have tens of millions without coverage; lead the world in medical related bankruptcy. 

Medicynical Note:  This is not rocket science.  The numbers tell the tale.  We pay more because our congress under the influence of the drug, hospital and health insurance lobbies has passed laws that allow and in some ways encourage the overcharging. 

And we’re stupid enough to pay.   And the republicans think this is the best system in the world.  The question is for whom?

Save a Trillion on Health Care—It’s not only feasible, it’s easy

Victor Fuchs tells us how to save a trillion on health care……by doing what other countries have done.

Americans spend more than 17 percent of GDP on health care; other high income industrial democracies spend only about 11 percent. The 6 percent difference in our $17 trillion economy amounts to $1 trillion..

The excess in the United States is primarily attributable to a more expensive mix of procedures and services, higher prices paid to drug companies and physicians, and inefficiencies in the financing of health care. There are undoubtedly cultural differences between the United States and other countries, but it is also true that Swedes differ from Italians, Germans from French, and the English from all of the above.

Read the article.

Medicynical Note:  Essentially we need to change from a revenue generating system to a health care system.  It’s that easy. 

In the U.S. at every level the emphasis is on increasing revenue rather than improving health care, even with the advent of health reform.  We overuse, over prescribe and over charge without any brake on expenditures.  To gain control and assure access and quality we have to figure out the riddle—most other countries have figured it out.  I’m not optimistic we that we can do it because of our religious-like dogged devotion to failed approaches. 

Health Care in France: Expensive takes on a new meaning

An American in Paris becomes pregnant and encounters a “socialized” health care system.  Does she survive?  Are there “death panels?”  Oh the horror.   Read here

Medicynical note:  Expensive is relative and the U.S. is relatively the most expensive.  No other country is close.  

We also have a large uninsured population now decreasing no thanks to our repub friends.  We also lead the industrialized world in that dubious category.  

The best healthcare system in the world?  Not us.

American Health Care: It’s the Money, Stupid

American health care is the best  i.e. the most expensive in the world:  See this to get an idea of the problem:

According to his bill, the hospital charged $81,000 for a four-vial dose of the medication.

Shocked at the price tag, Ferguson told the Charlotte Observer he and his wife found the same vials online for retail prices as low as $750.

Medicynical Note:  Health care value is an oxymoron in the U.S.  To these “providers” it’s the money that counts.

Quality, cost efficiency, access, good outcomes are not their primary issues. 

Health Care: It’s about the money, again

Hospital systems just can’t resist the temptation to maximize revenue and profits.    Another example of this was cited in the NY Times “Hospital Chain said to Scheme to Inflate Bills”

In the the article:

Physicians hitting the target to admit at least half of the patients over 65 years old who entered the emergency department were color-coded green. The names of doctors who were close were yellow. Failing physicians were red.

The scorecards, according to one whistle-blower lawsuit, were just one of the many ways that Health Management Associates, a for-profit hospital chain based in Naples, Fla., kept tabs on an internal strategy that regulators and others say was intended to increase admissions, regardless of whether a patient needed hospital care, and pressure the doctors who worked at the hospital.

Read the article for the details.

Medicynical Note:  This is not much different than the common practice of having multiple levels of fees for services provided.  For insurers there are discounts sometimes exceeding 50% while individuals without insurance are charged the full rate.  

Going to the hospital is increasingly like going to a used car dealer (no offense intended).  Prices aren’t what they seem; you need to bargain hard for the best deal and yes scamming the customer and system seems to be a problem. 

Oh yes, did I mention health care value, quality and access……….not really a prime concern.

Hospital mergers: Not Good for the System or the Patient

Published in The Systhesis Project published by Robert Wood Johnson Foundation:

Hospital consolidation generally results in higher prices. This is true across geographic markets and different data sources. When hospitals merge in already concentrated markets, the price increase can be dramatic, often exceeding 20 percent.

Hospital competition improves quality of care. This is true under both administered price systems, such as Medicare and the English National Health Service, and market determined pricing such as the private health insurance market. The evidence is more mixed from studies of market determined systems, however.

Physician-hospital consolidation has not led to either improved quality or reduced costs. Studies find that consolidation was primarily for the purpose of enhanced bargaining power with payers, and hence did not lead to true integration. Consolidation without integration does not lead to enhanced performance.

Medicynical Note:  So consolidation costs more and doesn’t improve  care.  It also decreases choice, for example as when a religious based “Health”system dominates an area.  Not good. 

Hospital Costs: The ER Visit

We’ve talked about America’s high costs.  One reason is our overuse of ER’s for outpatient care.

The medical mafia makes a big deal about the “sacred” patient doctor relationship.  My experience the past several years is that first, there is nothing sacred going on here and second that the relationship is a somewhat romantic figment of our imagination–it no longer exists.

You realize, of course, that the solo practitioner has gone the way of dinosaurs.  For virtually everyone your family doctor (of one sort or another) is part of a group practice.  When you become ill more often than not you family doc, the guy/gal you have the sacred relationship with, is normally fully booked and you see another practitioner/nurse/physicians’ assistant.  Your doc may or may not even be aware that you have had a problem.  If you are hospitalized your care is turned over to yet another provider, the hospitalist.  Another doctor you have never met.

It’s even worse than implied above.  If you should have an emergency of one sort or another, real or not so real, you are advised to go to  the ER.  That shifts the responsibility for your care elsewhere and quite remarkably escalates our costs to unimaginable levels.  The “sacred” relationship is nowhere to be found.

Elizabeth Rosenthal of the NY Times discusses ER costs here.

A day spent as an inpatient at an American hospital costs on average more than $4,000, five times the charge in many other developed countries, according to the International Federation of Health Plans, a global network of health insurance industries. The most expensive hospitals charge more than $12,500 a day. And at many of them, including California Pacific Medical Center, emergency rooms are profit centers. That is why one of the simplest and oldest medical procedures — closing a wound with a needle and thread — typically leads to bills of at least $1,500 and often much more.

Medicynical Note: Read the article for the gory details.  But it is a fact that hospitals like other players in the health care game have little to no interest in fostering efficiency and cost savings–except to benefit their bottom line.  In regard to patient’s charges, their goal is to maximize them.  They inflate their charges to unimaginable levels then cut deals with high volume insurers.  Should you be uninsured they will  stick you with the full non-discounted amount.  To the little guy it’s as confusing as dealing with a used care dealer (no insult intended) and is nothing more than a legalized scam.  Horrifying as it is, that’s what’s become of my profession and American medicine. 

Health reform while not perfect is a start on rationalizing costs, providing universal coverage, and opening up the mystery of health care costs.

Cancer Drug Costs: We lead the World

During the periodic American Cancer Society money drives, or at the time of the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings we are told by fund raisers for cancer charities, drug companies and indeed some institutions out recruiting patients  of the great progress being made in cancer treatment.  What is not clearly revealed is that the great progress in decreased mortality from cancer has not been so much in treatment but rather in prevention (smoking cessation, abandonment of estrogen replacement, etc) and earlier diagnosis mostly from better disease screening.

To me, having practiced from the 70s until 2001, the major revolution in cancer treatment was not cures but costs.  We’ve been talking for several years about the spiraling increase in drug costs and limited benefit of many new drugs—i.e. the disparity between the drug company’s hype and actual outcomes.   Stephen Hall in New York Magazine covers much the same territory in his October 20th article, The Cost of Living.  In the article Hall notes:

Several weeks earlier, Saltz had traveled to Chicago to inflict a little premonitory sticker shock on his medical colleagues. He reviewed the recent clinical results of both Zaltrap and Avastin when used as a “second line” treatment, after initial treatment had failed. As Saltz reminded the other oncologists, Avastin was modestly effective as a second-line treatment—it extended median overall survival by 42 days, the same as Zaltrap—but it cost about $5,000 a month and, like Zaltrap, would have to be taken for many months to achieve that modest clinical benefit. The overall cost was so high that Saltz devoted the end of his talk to a back-of-the-envelope calculation, delivered via PowerPoint, that recast the question in terms of health-care costs: If you extended the 42 days survival to a year, “what is the cost of Avastin for one year of human life saved?”

The answer was astounding, even to doctors who have grown inured to the zero-gravity economics of cancer pharmaceuticals. As Saltz worked his way through slide 73 of 78, he arrived at the bottom line: $303,000.

He notes that this cost is that of the drug alone.  and does not include doctor’s fees, imaging costs and hospitalizations and other costs encountered by seriously ill patients.

Read the article.   Our costs for cancer treatment, like all other modalities of care, are significantly higher than any other country on earth.

Medicynical Note:  For patients it’s a case of your money or your life, But the sad truth is that in advanced disease even if the patient is one of those that has some benefit, it is both.  The question is how much can an individual or health care system afford?