Many of the public health advocates and health policy wonks believe that tracking quality metrics, formulating treatment guidelines and establishing pay-for-performance initiatives will improve patient care. Sadly, three-quarter of physicians surveyed on the front lines of patient care disagree. Only one-quarter of physicians surveyed think quality measure and treatment guidelines will improve patient care.
Can we not all agree that physicians’ responses to these kind of queries are hardly unbiased? I don’t understand how polling of care providers is, in and of itself, a compelling argument.
Furthermore, I question the value of their opinions even if they were impartial. So many fields of study are at play when assessing the impacts of health reform: sociology, consumer behavior, economics, psychology, accounting, etc. In the same way that you wouldn’t value the opinion of individual soldiers in assessing aggregate impact of the Tet Offensive, you shouldn’t overvalue the appraisal of health reform by an doctors. Just because they’re fighting the battle doesn’t qualify them to explain the war.
Mr. Glasgow, The difference is the actions of a soldier are designed by central planners and it is not necessary for the soldier to have all the information of a mission in order for him or her to carry out orders. Your physician, however, is tasked to concentrate his or her efforts on your individual health and must obtain as much information as is practically available and then proceed autonomously. When it is your personal battle being waged, do you want your physician’s role to be as a soldier or as commander?.
I’m surprised that that one-quarter of physicians surveyed who think quality measure and treatment guidelines will improve patient care is even that high.
Many of the public health advocates and health policy wonks believe that tracking quality metrics, formulating treatment guidelines and establishing pay-for-performance initiatives will improve patient care. Sadly, three-quarter of physicians surveyed on the front lines of patient care disagree. Only one-quarter of physicians surveyed think quality measure and treatment guidelines will improve patient care.
That fits with what my doctors, including dentist, have said. None expecrt an improvment.
Can we not all agree that physicians’ responses to these kind of queries are hardly unbiased? I don’t understand how polling of care providers is, in and of itself, a compelling argument.
Furthermore, I question the value of their opinions even if they were impartial. So many fields of study are at play when assessing the impacts of health reform: sociology, consumer behavior, economics, psychology, accounting, etc. In the same way that you wouldn’t value the opinion of individual soldiers in assessing aggregate impact of the Tet Offensive, you shouldn’t overvalue the appraisal of health reform by an doctors. Just because they’re fighting the battle doesn’t qualify them to explain the war.
Mr. Glasgow, The difference is the actions of a soldier are designed by central planners and it is not necessary for the soldier to have all the information of a mission in order for him or her to carry out orders. Your physician, however, is tasked to concentrate his or her efforts on your individual health and must obtain as much information as is practically available and then proceed autonomously. When it is your personal battle being waged, do you want your physician’s role to be as a soldier or as commander?.
I’m surprised that that one-quarter of physicians surveyed who think quality measure and treatment guidelines will improve patient care is even that high.