« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Is It Better Treatment Or No Treatment?

One of the thing we’ve been told over the years is the value of the regular check up with your doctor. This visit is supposed to allow you to identify diseases and conditions early enough to provide your doctor with the opportunity to treat it before it becomes a serious condition.

Now a study suggests that check ups don’t do much at all.

Citizens who were told routine health checks were too expensive and so people did not get them, to the detriment of their health and higher costs later, just got good and bad news; the good news is that a new review says people don’t need them. The bad news is that will be a reason not to have them available when the Affordable Care Act goes into force.

Check-ups don’t reduce overall deaths or prevent serious diseases like cancer and heart disease, according to Cochrane researchers who carried out a systematic review on the subject. They warn against offering general health checks as part of a public health program, which is the opposite of what Americans have been told by the medical community for decades.

In some countries, general health checks are offered as part of standard practice, which should reduce deaths and ill health by enabling early detection and treatment of disease. Instead, there are potential negative implications, for example diagnosis and treatment of conditions that might never have led to any symptoms of disease or shortened life.

However, based on nine trials with a total of 11,940 deaths, the researchers found no difference between the number of deaths in the two groups in the long term, either overall or specifically due to cancer or heart disease. Other outcomes were poorly studied, but suggested that offering general health checks has no impact on hospital admissions, disability, worry, specialist referrals, additional visits to doctors or time off work.

This finding falls in line with recent recommendations by the US Preventive Services Task Force. This organization has recommended that mammograms not be rountinely recommended and that PSA screening not be used as a diagnostic tool for prostate cancer. This is not a benign recommendation as health care providers are not required to provide services which the USPSTF recommends against. Similarly, the medical establishment is unified against the use of full body CT scans as tool for diagnosing previously undiagnosed diseases.

In the mammography controversy, the USPSTF concluded that while mammograms in younger women saved some lives, it just didn’t save enough of them:

While roughly 15 percent of women in their 40s detect breast cancer through mammography, many other women experience false positives, anxiety, and unnecessary biopsies as a result of the test, according to data.

I would submit that given the choice between breast cancer and “anxiety” most women will choose anxiety.

But their rationale in this case loops back to the finding that check ups do no good. From the previous article on routine mammography:

“All we are saying is, at age 40, a woman should make an appointment with her doctor and have a conversation about the benefits and harms of having a mammography now versus waiting to age 50,” said Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chair of the task force.

Therein lies the problem. Most of us don’t look forward to going to see a doctor. We go because we have an illness we can no longer ignore… or because of a routine check up. Even when we are there, we are reluctant to complain about ailments. In the case of conditions like high blood pressure and Type II diabetes and glaucoma — conditions with huge quality of life implications but not covered in the study — there are virtually no symptoms that will compel you to seek medical care until you are irretrievably ill.

One would like to take the best view of this trend but given the politics and economics of the situation it is difficult to do so. These moves seemed designed to reduce up front medical costs and prevent chronic medical conditions from being discovered until they have progressed to a point where they are serious, if not fatal, conditions.

This is a way of minimizing that 70% of medical expenses that do not occur during the last year of life by simply not diagnosing and managing them over a period of decades. And as we’ve already seen, once you become seriously ill it is very easy to start trimming expenses from the last year of life.

COMMENTS

  • lineholder

    “These moves seemed designed to reduce up front medical costs and prevent chronic medical conditions from being discovered until they have progressed to a point where they are serious, if not fatal, conditions.” And in the context of reality, Obamacare will accelerate this type of scenario.

    In theory, Obamacare is designed to shift the focus to preventive and predictive medicine best clinical practices that could reduce the number of chronic illnesses, which theoretically would reduce the costs associated with these chronic illnesses over time. The general mindset of the health care industry has been that it would collectively prefer taking this kind of approach rather than implementing widespread measures rationing health care. (For both moral and economic reasons). But as the policy positions of DHHS have been announced via the many “the Secretary shall determine” provisions, the health care industry is beginning to realize that the policies are such that it will put patients with chronic illnesses at risk. And the health care industry, collectively, isn’t willing to accept this predetermined goal of Obamacare.

    It’s starting to get really interesting now, streiff. The biggest obstacle that the health care industry is facing is one of time utilization at the primary care/ internist level, because these are the physicians on which Obamacare places the greatest demands of time, many areas of our country are facing a shortage of these types of physicians, and many of these physicians aren’t in a position financially where they can accept the trade-off of lower-paying reimbursement for wellness/preventive care over the higher-paying reimbursement of case management for chronic illness. So, what’s starting to happen is that the health care community is beginning to act like a true “community” in regards to supporting each other. At least in comparison to what it has been in recent years.

    Here’s an example…we’re getting into flu season, right? And flu shots fall under the preventive/wellness initiatives. Rather than have local PCPs delegate a significant chunk of their time to providing flu shots, one of the larger health care orgs in my state took the initiative on this one, reviewed data from EMRs, identified patients who needed the flu shots, and set up a “service line” approach for flu shots. They succeeded in providing 10K shots in one day! It may not seem like that big a deal, but the time factor is more important than it seems, particularly when it comes to allowing physicians to continue to provide case management for patients with chronic illnesses.

    We’ll have to see how it goes, but the business model for health care provision is definitely changing. Just not necessarily within the scope of actions that the proponents for rationing of care might be hoping for at this point.

  • davesinsanantonio

    Just one example of the fact that Obummercare is only there for you while you are healthy. Once you get to be more of a liability than a source of cash, they want you to just die. Good on you and your new doctor.

  • Pingback: aci Sarault

  • Pingback: Wai Youngren

  • Pingback: Car Forum

  • Pingback: Investment House

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: Reverse Number Lookup

  • Pingback: randki za darmo

  • Pingback: randka przez internet

  • Pingback: είδη υγιεινής

  • Pingback: rewelacyjny portla randkowy

  • Pingback: randki we wroclawiu

  • Pingback: randki internetowe

  • Pingback: steel strapping

  • Pingback: ethanol

  • Pingback: Fun holiday costume idea

  • Pingback: weddings in italy

  • Pingback: arredo bagno

  • Pingback: Web Design

  • Pingback: You Can Find Out More

  • Pingback: Check This Out

  • Pingback: breast actives

  • Pingback: igra karos online

  • Pingback: madam lux

  • Pingback: working from home uk

  • Pingback: desain interior rumah

  • Pingback: biaya bangun rumah

  • Pingback: Pat Mende

  • Pingback: Becki Dufrane

  • Pingback: Ty Baudoin

  • Pingback: Flooring Installers

  • Pingback: http://wwww.loansandbadcredit.org

  • Pingback: Heide Lenoue

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: phone numbers for free

  • Pingback: Automotive Forum

  • Pingback: Flockenfutter

  • Pingback: แทงบอลออนไลน์

  • Pingback: wzór cv

  • Pingback: cv

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: alcohol distilling

  • Pingback: kids bikes