Literature DB >> 9952205

Avoiding the unintended consequences of growth in medical care: how might more be worse?

E S Fisher1, H G Welch.   

Abstract

The United States has experienced dramatic growth in both the technical capabilities and share of resources devoted to medical care. While the benefits of more medical care are widely recognized, the possibility that harm may result from growth has received little attention. Because harm from more medical care is unexpected, findings of harm are discounted or ignored. We suggest that such findings may indicate a more general problem and deserve serious consideration. First, we delineate 2 levels of decision making where more medical care may be introduced: (1) decisions about whether or not to use a discrete diagnostic or therapeutic intervention and (2) decisions about whether to add system capacity, eg, the decision to purchase another scanner or employ another physician. Second, we explore how more medical care at either level may lead to harm. More diagnosis creates the potential for labeling and detection of pseudodisease--disease that would never become apparent to patients during their lifetime without testing. More treatment may lead to tampering, interventions to correct random rather than systematic variation, and lower treatment thresholds, where the risks outweigh the potential benefits. Because there are more diagnoses to treat and more treatments to provide, physicians may be more likely to make mistakes and to be distracted from the issues of greatest concern to their patients. Finally, we turn to the fundamental challenge--reducing the risk of harm from more medical care. We identify 4 ways in which inadequate information and improper reasoning may allow harmful practices to be adopted-a constrained model of disease, excessive extrapolation, a missing level of analysis, and the assumption that more is better.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health Care and Public Health; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 9952205     DOI: 10.1001/jama.281.5.446

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  55 in total

Review 1.  New paradigms for quality in primary care.

Authors:  B Starfield
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  The myth of technology in health care.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.525

Review 3.  The paradox of health care.

Authors:  B Hofmann
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2001

Review 4.  On the value-ladenness of technology in medicine.

Authors:  B Hofmann
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2001

Review 5.  The significance of quality of life in health care.

Authors:  Robert M Kaplan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Cost-sharing for emergency care and unfavorable clinical events: findings from the safety and financial ramifications of ED copayments study.

Authors:  John Hsu; Mary Price; Richard Brand; G Thomas Ray; Bruce Fireman; Joseph P Newhouse; Joseph V Selby
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 7.  Beware: the misuse of technology and the law of unintended consequences.

Authors:  John M Freeman
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 7.620

8.  Malpractice liability costs and the practice of medicine in the Medicare program.

Authors:  Katherine Baicker; Elliott S Fisher; Amitabh Chandra
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 9.  Technological medicine and the autonomy of man.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2002

Review 10.  Implementing risk-aligned bladder cancer surveillance care.

Authors:  Florian R Schroeck; Nicholas Smith; Jeremy B Shelton
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 3.498

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.