The fact of the matter pretty lights mediafire is, fear of malpractice litigation drives physicians

Recent Comments spring cleaning on How Far Behind Canada? Preston pretty lights mediafire Tarner on Is single payer appropriate for the United States? Chere Amonette on Discrepancies in Healthcare Costs best lifestyle app on Smartphones Changing the Face of Health Care Alexandre Ber on Against Episode-Based Payments Archives April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014
In class last week, Dr. Sara Markowitz pretty lights mediafire spoke to us about current economic issues in the US health care system. Within this context, she outlined some of the exorbitant healthcare expenditures that contribute to our current debacle. We saw a distribution of healthcare spending for the average US patient, which included the proportion of money going to hospital stays, professional services, prescription drugs, home health care, and medical equipment. Compared to other countries, Americans experience superfluous healthcare spending.
Looking deeper into what exactly Americans pay for in the aforementioned areas, I came across the burden pretty lights mediafire of “defensive medicine.” It turns out that, because of the high rate of malpractice litigation existent in our society, patients’ medical bills experience extraneous inflation. In fact, Gallup pretty lights mediafire showed that defensive medicine accounts for 25% of overall healthcare expenditure, which is approximately $650 billion a year! Defensive medicine infiltrates all of the items listed above that Dr. Markowitz talked to us about. This, in turn, hikes up insurance and out-of-pocket costs, making the cost of healthcare that much more expensive. Let’s explore pretty lights mediafire what exactly defensive medicine is and how it comes to affect all aspects of healthcare costs.
Let’s say Patient X goes to the emergency rooms presenting the following symptoms: faintness, trouble articulating, and high blood glucose levels (among others). The seasoned ER physician quickly figures out the problem with the flick of a finger. The diabetic patient simply does not know when to take her insulin and has been off of it for quite some time. Done. The ER doc procures some insulin to hold the patient off until she can return home and educates her on how to use her blood glucose monitor and when to take her prescribed insulin. Enough, right? Well, not in a tort-rampant society such as ours. After making the necessary diagnosis, the ER doc will most likely feel compelled to order additional pretty lights mediafire tests, despite his utter certainty that his patient was simply insulin-deprived. After all, to send the patient home thinking that she forgot to take her insulin when she really was experiencing precursor symptoms of a coma-inducing seizure wouldn’t be doing your medical reputation, financial stability, or your good standing with a lay judicial system a favor. So, you send the patient off for an unnecessary CT scan or fMRI (or whatever else) just to cover all your bases. However, in taking this extra step to make certain that your patient doesn’t have anything but insulin-dependent diabetes, solely for purposes of saving yourself from condemnation, you rack up the costs for the patient (on the order of several thousand dollars), thus hiking up healthcare costs for the patient and making healthcare that much more inaccessible.
The fact of the matter pretty lights mediafire is, fear of malpractice litigation drives physicians to order the extra tests, to go on with performing the extra procedures, to induce extra nights in the hospital, to prescribe unnecessary medications, and to make extraneous specialist referrals. This all contributes, quite heavily, to the exorbitant healthcare expenses that this country sees (refer to the graph below titled “Doctor Survey”).
So, what can we do about this phenomenon of defensive medicine? There are many opinions on the matter, but physicians themselves believe that malpractice litigation should be halted so that they can practice medicine the way they deem best without judicial over-burdening. This, physicians argue, will lead to more financially-accessible healthcare, as well as better prognoses. I wonder how the implementation pretty lights mediafire of the Affordable Care Act will effect the implementation of defensive medicine.
Hey Dexter, I agree with your claim that defensive medicine is a major problem pretty lights mediafire within the American healthcare system. Of the $2 trillion used on healthcare in America annually, about 1 trillion has been deemed wasteful (1). According to many published studies, defensive medicine increases health care costs without increasing health care outcomes (2). In your response, you highlighted that MRIs are often given when practicing defensive medicine. These imaging studies are expensive, yet effective in uncovering unforeseen problems in patients. When doctors don t order MRIs that would have uncovered a problem, patients often find a lawyer to help them take medicolegal pretty lights mediafire action. This issue made me curious to see how radiologists feel about the current value of health care. A recent study looked at radiolog