Is Spending More Always Wasteful? The Appropriateness Of Care And Outcomes Among Colorectal Cancer Patients
Open Access
- 1 January 2008
- journal article
- Published by Health Affairs (Project Hope) in Health Affairs
- Vol. 27 (1) , 159-168
- https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.27.1.159
Abstract
Increased area-level medical spending is not correlated with improved patient outcomes or quality, thereby supporting the case for spending reductions in high-spending regions. However, all additional spending need not be wasteful. Examining the care of patients with colorectal cancer, we show that high-spending regions are more likely than other regions to use recommended care but are also more likely to use discretionary and nonrecommended care, the latter of which has adverse outcomes for patients. Our results show that instead of cutting spending, policies designed to target services to patients most likely to benefit could increase the value of medical spending.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- National Health Spending In 2004: Recent Slowdown Led By Prescription Drug SpendingHealth Affairs, 2006
- U.S. Health System Performance: A National ScorecardHealth Affairs, 2006
- Systemic Therapy for Colorectal CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Use of hospitals, physician visits, and hospice care during last six months of life among cohorts loyal to highly respected hospitals in the United StatesBMJ, 2004
- Medicare Spending, The Physician Workforce, And Beneficiaries' Quality Of CareHealth Affairs, 2004
- Proposal of the Physicians' Working Group for Single-Payer National Health InsuranceJAMA, 2003
- Patient Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics in the SEER-Medicare DatabaseMedical Care, 2002
- Overview of the SEER-Medicare DataMedical Care, 2002
- Geography And The Debate Over Medicare ReformHealth Affairs, 2002
- Who Gets Adjuvant Treatment for Stage II and III Rectal Cancer? Insight From Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–MedicareJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2001