Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Chronic (medicine). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chronic (medicine). Show all posts

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Why Improving Access to Health Care Does Not Save Money

Today's post was shared by The New York Times and comes from www.nytimes.com

One of the oft-repeated arguments in favor of the Affordable Care Act is that it will reduce people’s need for more intensive care by increasing their access to preventive care. For example, people will use the emergency room less often because they will be able to see primary care physicians. Or, they will not develop as many chronic illnesses because they will be properly screened and treated early on. And they will not require significant and invasive care down the line because they will be better managed ahead of time.
Moreover, it is often asserted that these developments will lead to reductions in health care spending. Unfortunately, a growing body of evidence makes the case that this may not be true.
One of the most important facts about health care overhaul, and one that is often overlooked, is that all changes to the health care system involve trade-offs among access, quality and cost. You can improve one of these – maybe two – but it will almost always result in some other aspect getting worse.


You can make the health care system achieve better outcomes. But that will usually cost more or require some change in access. You can make it cheaper, but access or quality may take a hit. And you can expand access, but that will increase cost or result in some change in quality.
The A.C.A. was primarily about access: making it easier for people to get insurance and the care it allows. The law also tries to make changes that may bend the curve of spending...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Saturday, December 14, 2013

When Life Goes On, and On ...

The debate over a longer lifespan confronts many issued including medical costs, insurance coverage and quality of life. Workers' Compensation programs pay for lifetime care also in most instances. Today's post is shared from the NYTimes.org  .
To the Editor:
Re “On Dying After Your Time,” by Daniel Callahan (Sunday Review, Dec. 1): Mainstream aging research neither promises radical immortality nor seeks to keep old people sick longer. Aging is a driving factor in the most prevalent and costly chronic diseases. Research indicates that interventions slowing aging delay the onset of these diseases. Therefore, they extend not only life span but also health span, the disease-free and functional period of life.
Fundamentally, the goals of aging research are not dissimilar from efforts to prevent or treat Alzheimer’s or other chronic diseases in that they both seek to improve quality of life in the elderly. The difference is that interventions in aging may prevent not just one but a range of debilitating diseases simultaneously.
The reality is that the world is rapidly getting older. With baby boomers leaving the work force, there won’t be enough workers to pay the ever-increasing Medicare costs of the retired. Extending health span will lower Medicare costs and allow aging people to stay engaged.
Interventions that slow human aging will provide a powerful modality of preventive medicine: improving quality of life by keeping people...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Monday, October 21, 2013

Your prescription history is their business

Drug history
Think you can keep a medical condition secret from life insurers by paying cash for prescription meds? Think again.

A for-profit service called ScriptCheck exists to rat you out regardless of how diligent you are in trying to keep a sensitive matter under wraps.
ScriptCheck, offered by ExamOne, a subsidiary of Quest Diagnostics, is yet another example of data mining — using sophisticated programs to scour databases in search of people's personal information and then selling that info to interested parties.

To be sure, life insurers have a need to know as much as possible about the people they cover. This helps mitigate risk and potentially keep rates affordable for everyone.

But for anyone who is taking an antidepressant, say, or being treated for a chronic condition, privacy can be a key consideration. You may not want employers — or potential employers — to know what you're taking. By the same token, you may not want to risk a potentially sharp increase in insurance premiums.

"It's a tough issue," said David Bryant, a Los Angeles life and health insurance broker. "From the consumer's perspective, you may want to keep certain things under wraps. But when you buy a policy, an insurer will want to pull all information about you."

And thanks to ScriptCheck, the insurer doesn't have to give things a second thought. By purchasing this or a similar service, the insurer can be notified of all prescriptions you've filled in recent years, regardless of how...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Sunday, October 13, 2013

The Soaring Cost of a Simple Breath

Cost in the US for pharmaceutical medications are a stressor for all including workers' compensation carriers. The blame is targeted to injured workers for causing the problem. In actuality it appears that big pharma maybe the problem. Perhaps Federal legislation should  allow cheaper rates for workers' compensation programs. Today's post is shared from nytimes.com.
The kitchen counter in the home of the Hayes family is scattered with the inhalers, sprays and bottles of pills that have allowed Hannah, 13, and her sister, Abby, 10, to excel at dance and gymnastics despite a horrific pollen season that has set off asthma attacks, leaving the girls struggling to breathe.
Asthma — the most common chronic disease that affects Americans of all ages, about 40 million people — can usually be well controlled with drugs. But being able to afford prescription medications in the United States often requires top-notch insurance or plenty of disposable income, and time to hunt for deals and bargains.
The arsenal of medicines in the Hayeses’ kitchen helps explain why. Pulmicort, a steroid inhaler, generally retails for over $175 in the United States, while pharmacists in Britain buy the identical product for about $20 and dispense it free of charge to asthma patients. Albuterol, one of the oldest asthma medicines, typically costs $50 to $100 per inhaler in the United States, but it was less than $15 a decade ago, before it was repatented.
“The one that...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]