According to a white house affiliated website, the United States spent approximately $2.2 trillion on health care in the year of 2007, which comes out to $7,421 per person1. This is nearly twice the average of other developing nations across the globe. The Congressional Budget office estimates that at this rate, by 2025 one of every four dollars of our economy will be “tied up” in the health care system. Obviously, there needs to be a change. We feel that the democrat views are most similar to our own. We value the quality of technology available, equality among everyone who wants to use it, and accessibility for everyone as well.
We, along with many other Americans have high expectations about what medical technology can do for curing diseases and other sicknesses. According to Shi and Singh’s textbook, “Delivering Health Care in America”, 35 percent of Americans believe it is essential to have access to the most advanced tests, drugs, and medical procedures2. We believe that our nation needs to focus more on primary care and preventive services rather than specialty care. The nation’s expectations of doctors and patients are very high when it comes to use and availability of all technology. We are against supply-side rationing, and we believe that this would not be the correct solution to the problems our nation is facing with health care. This would only lead to longer waits and lower level of access among everyone. In some countries, people have to wait ten weeks for an MRI or four weeks for a CT scan. These tests are sometimes crucial for diagnosis and essential to know the results immediately. The long waits would result in more deaths.
The quality of our technology needs to continue. Technology continues to offer “improved remedies that are more effective, less invasive, or safer2. It was estimated that $2.5 trillion are wasted each year on the duplication of tests and unnecessary procedures. That statistic is absurd and should not even be a concern. We believe that records for all patients across the nation should be networked electronically. This would make health care more proficient and “provide valuable insights about costs and care”3. It would save tens of billions of dollars each year from reduced paper work and much quicker communication.
Access is also an issue. We value equality and accessibility. Our third and final belief is that everyone should be able to use the best technology if it is out there, despite any financial circumstances. Geographic access can be further improved by providing mobile equipment for communities that lack the necessary tools allowing new technology to be available to more people2.
Some believe that the topic of technology is being over relied on as a solution to health care problems. They believe that if we focus too much on the technology aspect it would affect the quality of care that patients receive. “Efforts to find a quick technological fix will likely run up against cultural challenges”3. However, we believe that if the technology is effectively used, it will enhance the present health care system and will lead to substantial savings and improvements in the quality of care that one can receive. Robert O’Harrow Jr., a Washington Post staff writer has done an incredible job at analyzing how technology can be used to enhance our nation’s health care system from all points of view.
Advancements in technology have the potential to save billions of dollars; however, if not controlled correctly it could possibly drive health care costs higher. Technology has huge impact on the delivery of health care. It has influenced the quality of care that people receive and access of new technology in remote areas has been improved as well.
REFERENCES
1. “Health Care”. The White House. Accessed February 13, 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/Issues/health-Care
2. Shi, Leiyu, and Douglas A. Singh. Delivering Health Care in America A Systems Approach. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett, 2007. Print.
3. O’Harrow Jr., Robert. “The Machinery Behind Health-Care Reform”. Washington Post. Accessed February 13, 2009.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/15/AR2009051503667.html>
You bring up a valid point about the cost of technology. Wouldn't it be great to just pick a surgery that uses the most high-tech equipment and costs the most, but without worrrying about what the burden will be on your bank account? I think that if something is proven to be more effective than traditional surgery but costs more, that money should not be a determining factor.
ReplyDeleteAs a student of Information Systems, I am very enthusiastic about the potential for technology to revolutionize the healthcare industry. Thank you for your comments on this subject.
ReplyDelete