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.

“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..”

Comments

  1. I've always wondered why we are willing to spend 50k for a transplant and not willing to spend $5 to prevent an infection in that same patient.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for submitting your comment to the Controversies blog. To reduce spam, all comments will be reviewed by the blog moderator prior to publishing. However, all legitimate comments will be published, whether they agree with or oppose the content of the post.

Most Read Posts (Last 30 Days)