Skip to main content

Eliminating Waste in US Health Care: Wise Words from Don Berwick

The United States spends more on health care than any other country. By far. Yet life expectancy in the United States is about the lowest among Western industrialized countries. While I can't prove it, I am coming to believe these is at least a partial cause and effect relationship between these facts.

How can that be? How can spending so much on health care actually be bad for the health of our country? There are several possible links:
  1. Many tests and procedures that are performed are unnecessary. Unnecessary tests and procedures cost a lot of money and harm patients.
  2. The dysfunctional primary care system in the US leads to uncoordinated care, less opportunity for preventive care, and more care in expensive acute care settings instead of from primary providers. This leads to both higher costs and poor health outcomes.
  3. The high cost of US health care makes both individuals and society poorer. Wealth is one of the strongest predictors of life expectancy--a fact that has been known for over 100 years. When an individual becomes poor because of their health costs, poverty may result in a decline in life expectancy. When health care increasingly robs the public purse, there is less available for other goods like education, which may have as much impact on life expectancy as health care.
In the most recent JAMA, there is a must read perspective from former (this word used with a mix of sadness and outrage) CMS head Don Berwick and Andrew Hackbarth that provides important insights into how we can reduce the cost of health care in the US.

Berwick suggests that is possible to markedly reduce the costs without depriving any patient of any needed service. No rationing needed at all. We just need to get serious about examining all the ways US health care spends money without benefiting patients.

Berkwick suggests we focus on 6 categories of waste that collectively cost hundreds of Billions of $$ a year:

  1. Failures of Care Delivery: Much of this is the costs of medical error
  2. Failures of Care Coordination: The costs when patients fall through the holes in our fragmented care system
  3. Overtreatment: The costs when patients are subjected to "care" that can not possibly help them (and likely hurts them)
  4. Administrative complexity: Costs from misguided policies and rules (such as complex billing procedures requiring doctors and hospitals to hire armies of coders)
  5. Pricing failures: Costs resulting from the absence of transparency and complex markets (i.e., why is the cost of a MRI in the US cost several times the cost in other countries?)
  6. Fraud and abuse: The costs of fake billing and health care scams
Berkwick estimates that getting serious about these 6 causes of waste at a minimum could save 21% of US health care costs (thats $558 billion dollars--$558,000,000,000). This is his conservative estimate. The actual savings are likely to be even greater.

The costs of the US healthcare system are unsustainable and if we don't do something they will bankrupt individuals, businesses, and our government. If we wait for bankruptcy, a slash and burn approach will probably result that will be bad for patients and providers. Berwick's wise counsel offers an approach that over the long term can cut costs and improve care. We should listen.

by: Ken Covinsky @geri_doc

Comments

Tim Haskett said…
Berwickians unite! We need to heed his advice and spread the word about the "6 categories of waste". Berwick is right on - the money is already in the system and there is plenty to go around as long as we spend it wisely and responsibly.
Great information you got here. I've been reading about this topic for one week now for my papers in school and thank God I found it here in your blog. I had a great time reading this.

Popular posts from this blog

Lost in Translation: Google’s Translation of Palliative Care to ‘Do-Nothing Care’

by: Cynthia X. Pan, MD, FACP, AGSF (@Cxpan5X)

My colleagues often ask me: “Why are Chinese patients so resistant to hospice and palliative care?” “Why are they so unrealistic?” “Don’t they understand that death is part of life?” “Is it true that with Chinese patients you cannot discuss advance directives?”

As a Chinese speaking geriatrician and palliative care physician practicing in Flushing, NY, I have cared for countless Chinese patients with serious illnesses or at end of life.  Invariably, when Chinese patients or families see me, they ask me if I speak Chinese. When I reply “I do” in Mandarin, the relief and instant trust I see on their faces make my day meaningful and worthwhile.

At my hospital, the patient population is about 30% Asian, with the majority of these being Chinese. Most of these patients require language interpretation.  It becomes an interesting challenge and opportunity, as we often need to discuss advance directives, goals of care, and end of life care options…

Delirium: A podcast with Sharon Inouye

In this week's GeriPal podcast we discuss delirium, with a focus on prevention. We are joined by internationally acclaimed delirium researcher Sharon Inouye, MD, MPH. Dr Inouye is Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Director of the Aging Brain Center in the Institute for Aging Research at Hebrew SeniorLife.

Dr. Inouye's research focuses on delirium and functional decline in hospitalized older patients, resulting in more than 200 peer-reviewed original articles to date. She has developed and validated a widely used tool to identify delirium called the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), and she founded the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) to prevent delirium in hospitalized patients.

We are also joined by guest host Lindsey Haddock, MD, a geriatrics fellow at UCSF who asks a great question about how to implement a HELP program, or aspects of the program, in a hospital with limited resources.  


You can also find us on Youtube!


Listen to GeriPal Podcasts on:
iTunes…

Are Palliative Care Providers Better Prognosticators? A Podcast with Bob Gramling

Estimating prognosis is hard and clinicians get very little training on how to do it.  Maybe that is one of the reasons that clinicians are more likely to be optimistic and tend to overestimate patient survival by a factor of between 3 and 5.  The question is, aren't we better as palliative care clinicians than others in estimating prognosis?  This is part of our training and we do it daily.   We got to be better, right? 

Well, on todays podcast we have Bob Gramling from the Holly and Bob Miller Chair of Palliative Medicine at the University of Vermont to talk about his paper in Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (JPSM) titled “Palliative Care Clinician Overestimation of Survival in Advanced Cancer: Disparities and Association with End of Life Care”.

Big findings from this JPSM paper include that we, like all other clinicians, are an optimistic bunch and that it actually does impact outcomes.   In particular, the people whose survival was overestimated by a palliative care c…