The $787 billion economic stimulus package that was signed into law last week includes one or two health-related measures that haven’t been widely publicized, but which are no less important for it.
One of these is the $1.1 billion that has been assigned for a study to compare the effectiveness of a large number of medical treatments, drugs, surgeries, and other current standard medical procedures and devices. A council of fifteen federal employees will be set up to coordinate the research and advise the President and Congress on where the money would best be spent.
The program is a response to growing concerns that doctors have little solid evidence on which to base the value of many of the treatments that are currently considered standard.
Questions to Answer with the Stimulus Package Health Care Money
According to Dr. Elliott S. Fisher of Dartmouth Medical School, the study will help answer questions such as these:
- Should severe neck pain be treated with physical therapy, medication, and exercise, or with surgery?
- What is the best combination of prescription medication and therapy for the treatment of depression?
- Is it more effective to treat arterial blockage in the legs with medication or with surgery?
- Is medication alone an effective treatment for chronic heart failure, or are active health intervention measures also necessary?
Second Concern: Rapidly Increasing Health Care Costs
A second concern is the rapidly increasing cost of health care. Healthcare spending hit a total of $2.2 trillion in 2007. That’s 16% of gross domestic product – and it’s been estimated that figure will hit 25% by 2025. It is hoped that the research will save money by discouraging the use of expensive treatments that are largely ineffective and, at the same time, boosting the use of more effective treatments. During her years as a senator, Hilary Rodham Clinton was a firm proponent of such research and President Obama endorsed the concept during his White House campaign.
Not everyone is supportive of the idea of spending millions of taxpayer dollars on health care comparison studies. Critics say it may allow the federal government to be too intrusive when it comes to personal health care choices, and may jeopardize the doctor-patient relationship by put the government squarely between patients and health care professions. Others worry that insurance companies will use the data gained from the study as an excuse to deny coverage of more costly medical treatments.
photo credit: Emily Taliaferro Prince