Medical expenditures for cancer are projected to reach at least $158 billion in today’s dollars by 2020. That’s a 27 percent increase, assuming that incidence and treatment costs remain at 2010 levels, according to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) analysis of growth and aging of the U.S. population.
But new diagnostic tools and treatments could raise medical expenditures as high as $207 billion, assuming that the costs of new treatments increases 5 percent, said the researchers from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the NIH. The analysis appears in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Recent trends reflect a 2 percent annual increase in medical costs in the initial and final phases of care, which would boost projected 2020 costs to $173 billion.Projections of expenses, assuming steady incidence and survival rates and no increase in treatment costs
Projections were based on the most recent data available on cancer incidence, survival and costs of care. In 2010, medical costs associated with cancer were projected to reach $127.6 billion, with the highest costs associated with breast cancer ($16.5 billion), followed by colorectal cancer ($14 billion), lymphoma ($12 billion), lung cancer ($12 billion) and prostate cancer ($12 billion). Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
The American Medical Association (AMA) had a press release [recently] announcing findings from their survey on the impact of insurance company preauthorization policies.
Surprisingly, they discovered that these policies use physician time and delay treatment. It’s funny, because preauthorization policies were designed to save money. And I imagine they do, for the insurer, but they cost money for everyone else. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Shrink Rap*
Flush from their big win in the midterms, the Boehners are vowing to repeal and replace the Big O’s health reform law. They pose a legitimate threat, but an even larger one lies in the courts, where suits challenging the constitutionality of the law have been popping up like fireflies on a late August night.
In Virginia for example, Republican-appointed Federal District Court Judge Henry Hudson has indicated that the Individual Mandate — a key provision of the law that has been challenged in a suit filed in his court by the state’s Republican Attorney General — might not pass his sniff test.
Hudson said he’d rule on the matter this month. If he deems the provision to be unconstitutional, he might (it’s unlikely, but he might) enjoin the law altogether until higher courts rule on the matter. Holy Kazakhstan, Batman!
An official at Camp Obama, who spoke with the New York Times under the condition that his name not be WikiLeaked, acknowledged that Hudson’s thumbs appear to be pointing downward, indeed. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Pizaazz*
In response to my recent post where I averred that the cigarette companies were treated as scapegoats, I have had several cyber and actual conversations about personal responsibility. I believe that folks should realize the consequences and the benefits of freely-made decisions.
While we want American society to be compassionate, we do not want to punish success and reward failure. Our goal is to do all that we can to maximize everyone’s success. We should be ready to assist those who need and deserve our private and governmental assistance, but personal effort and responsibility are necessary elements of these interventions.
In our gastrroenterology practice, when we see patients who are in financial difficulty, my physician partners and staff will do all that we can to help them. While it is not our policy to do colonoscopies for free, we will make whatever adjustments that are necessary to make sure that the patient receives necessary medical care. However, when patients who owe us money hang up on our calls, or express their view of medical entitlement with foul language, then we forward these accounts to a collection agency.
There is also a self-interest angle to supporting assistance for those in need: One day we may need a boost ourselves. Recall the concept of privatizing social security, a sound proposal that was vilified and snuffed out during George W. Bush’s presidency. Antagonism against this modest proposal was seasoned with a large measure of arrogance, a splash of hubris and a dash of paternalism. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at MD Whistleblower*
Looking for a great story about the state of hospital care in America? Look no further. The Health Care Blog has a great article by hospitalist Dr. Robert Wachter that sums it up nicely. It’s about money. Thats how hospitals get paid. That’s how everyone gets paid. It will always be about money. We don’t pay doctors, nurses, or administrators with smiley faces and candy canes. We pay them with cold hard cash. For example:
One of the physicians, an invasive cardiologist, stopped me in my tracks. “Actually, our hospital already provides a tremendous amount of support and feedback,” he said. “When I perform a catheterization or angioplasty, a hospital staff member watches the entire procedure, she sometimes suggests mid-course corrections, and as soon as I’m done she provides me detailed feedback on whether I met all the best practice standards.”
“Wow,” I said. “Your hospital is really taking quality seriously!”
“Oh,” he replied, mischievous smile on his face, “she’s not from the quality department. She’s from the billing department.”
The question should not be how do you get profit out of medicine. The question should be how do you get quality into profit. We need profit. The last thing you want in this country is universal VA health care. Trust me on that. Americans would never stand for it. But how do you get both? Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at The Happy Hospitalist*