“Clinicians and policy makers should not apply one standard when tacitly continuing the status quo and a different standard when evaluating innovative programs that might be implemented. It certainly does not make sense to use one criterion—Are there clinical benefits?—for coverage decisions for treatments and a different criterion—Are health care savings greater than program costs?—for preventive services..”
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Value versus return on investment
The Viewpoint piece in today’s JAMA is a helpful reminder to step back and ask why we often apply a different standard to prevention programs (will they save more money than they cost?) than we do to other healthcare expenditures. I’ll paste an excerpt below, but you can read the whole thing here.