14 thoughts on “Unnecessary Care”

1. I don’t understand how any of these screenings and procedures are low-value? Just because they may cost less doesn’t mean that they aren’t saving lives.

   1. It doesn’t have to do with cost. They’re talking about “26 tests and procedures that have been found to offer little or no clinical benefit.”

      1. So “low-value” services are evaluated on their impact, not the cost?

         1. Precisely, Ava!

2. Hi Jessica. I like your point, but if you read the article more closely, you will see that the study identifies “specific services to limit and can characterize low-value care even among the most efficient providers.”

3. I think this is yet another symptom of our broken medical malpractice system. Of course doctors are ordering unnecessary screenings. Even if 99.99% of patients don’t actually need the procedure, it’s worth it to them if it ensures they don’t get sued by the 1 out of 1,000 who does benefit.

   1. Not to mention that they get paid for conducting the procedure in the first place. From the doctor’s point of view, ordering it even if it’s not really necessary is a win-win.

      1. Absolutely, but wouldn’t an ideal system be where every procedure can be done but at a smaller cost?

4. “Forty-two percent of beneficiaries received at least one such service, costing Medicare $8.5 billion, or 2.7 percent of spending.”

   That’s so much waste.

   1. Right? If we know these procedures generally don’t help people, why are we bothering to do them?

      1. Because when the government is footing the bill, who cares how much it costs?

      2. Because the medical field has been reduced to poking things with a stick until we figure it out – and even after we figure it out – so we can say we did everything we could and avoid lawsuits.

      3. This is why patient care needs to be more individualized.

         1. I completely agree. If patients were footing the bill for these procedures, they’d want a larger say.

Comments are closed.