sws4420
08-23-2009, 06:59 AM
http://image2.examiner.com/images/blog/author/img312img98delia.jpg by Dr. Delia Chiaramonte
Creating a new healthcare system while decreasing health care costs is a lofty goal. Obama hopes to control runaway health care spending so that funds are available to support improved health and wellness programs.
It is hard to disagree with the theory behind this plan. Stop wasting money and use the extra to benefit society. So far, so good.
But who controls the healthcare spending? Much of the costs generated in the system are initiated by physicians. Whether on a prescription pad or a hospital order sheet, doctors are responsible for ordering many of the expensive tests and procedures that contribute to our excess spending. So, how do we get doctors to order fewer tests and procedures? Obama has mentioned the use of evidence-based guidelines as a way to reign in over-zealous doctors. This may do some good, but why concentrate on small fish when there are big ones swimming by? The big fish that would change physician behavior is tort reform.
Doctors practice defensive medicine because they are afraid of being sued. The threat of huge jury awards, often surpassing the doctor's insurance coverage, hovers in the shadows and influences the doctors' decisions. Tort reform can help.
Why is Obama not including malpractice reform in his toolbox for healing our broken healthcare system? Some are suspicious that strong lobbying from trial lawyers, and the threat of losing their generous contributions, may be involved.
It would be a shame to come this close to real healthcare reform without addressing the issue of malpractice liability. As long as doctors feel threatened they will continue to practice defensive medicine. And they will spend a lot of healthcare dollars in the process.
This is what Obama said recently to the American Medical Association:
"Now, I recognize that it will be hard to make some of these changes if doctors feel like they are constantly looking over their shoulder for fear of lawsuits. Some doctors may feel the need to order more tests and treatments to avoid being legally vulnerable. That’s a real issue. And while I’m not advocating caps on malpractice awards which I believe can be unfair to people who’ve been wrongfully harmed, I do think we need to explore a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first, let doctors focus on practicing medicine, and encourage broader use of evidence-based guidelines. That’s how we can scale back the excessive defensive medicine reinforcing our current system of more treatment rather than better care."
Can you really fix the healthcare system without addressing one of the most compelling issues for physicians? Doubtful.
http://www.examiner.com/x-209-Baltimore-Health-Examiner~y2009m8d22-Where-is-tort-reform-in-the-healthcare-debate
Creating a new healthcare system while decreasing health care costs is a lofty goal. Obama hopes to control runaway health care spending so that funds are available to support improved health and wellness programs.
It is hard to disagree with the theory behind this plan. Stop wasting money and use the extra to benefit society. So far, so good.
But who controls the healthcare spending? Much of the costs generated in the system are initiated by physicians. Whether on a prescription pad or a hospital order sheet, doctors are responsible for ordering many of the expensive tests and procedures that contribute to our excess spending. So, how do we get doctors to order fewer tests and procedures? Obama has mentioned the use of evidence-based guidelines as a way to reign in over-zealous doctors. This may do some good, but why concentrate on small fish when there are big ones swimming by? The big fish that would change physician behavior is tort reform.
Doctors practice defensive medicine because they are afraid of being sued. The threat of huge jury awards, often surpassing the doctor's insurance coverage, hovers in the shadows and influences the doctors' decisions. Tort reform can help.
Why is Obama not including malpractice reform in his toolbox for healing our broken healthcare system? Some are suspicious that strong lobbying from trial lawyers, and the threat of losing their generous contributions, may be involved.
It would be a shame to come this close to real healthcare reform without addressing the issue of malpractice liability. As long as doctors feel threatened they will continue to practice defensive medicine. And they will spend a lot of healthcare dollars in the process.
This is what Obama said recently to the American Medical Association:
"Now, I recognize that it will be hard to make some of these changes if doctors feel like they are constantly looking over their shoulder for fear of lawsuits. Some doctors may feel the need to order more tests and treatments to avoid being legally vulnerable. That’s a real issue. And while I’m not advocating caps on malpractice awards which I believe can be unfair to people who’ve been wrongfully harmed, I do think we need to explore a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first, let doctors focus on practicing medicine, and encourage broader use of evidence-based guidelines. That’s how we can scale back the excessive defensive medicine reinforcing our current system of more treatment rather than better care."
Can you really fix the healthcare system without addressing one of the most compelling issues for physicians? Doubtful.
http://www.examiner.com/x-209-Baltimore-Health-Examiner~y2009m8d22-Where-is-tort-reform-in-the-healthcare-debate