Guest guest Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html"Shocking chasm between Medicare coverage and clinical evidence"By Schwitzer on May 27, 2011 9:52 AM | 1 Comment | No TrackBacksThat's a phrase used by Rita F. Redberg, MD, University of California San Francisco cardiologist and the editor ofArchives of Internal Medicine, in her New York Times opinion piece, "Squandern procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered. Examples abound:• Medicare pays for routine screening colonoscopies in patients over 75 even though the United States Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of experts financed by the Department of Health and Human Services, advises against them (and against any colonoscopies for patients over 85), because it takes at least eight years to realize any benefits from the procedure. Moreover, colonoscopies carry risks of serious complications (like perforations) and often lead to further unnecessary procedures (like biopsies). In 2009, Medicare paid doctors more than $100 million for nearly 550,000 screening colonoscopies; around 40 percent were for patients over 75.• The task force recommends against screening for prostate cancer in men 75 and older, and screening for cervical cancer in women 65 and older who have had a previous normal Pap smear, but Medicare spent more than $50 million in 2008 on such screenings, as well as additional money on unnecessary procedures that often follow.• Two recent randomized trials found that patients receiving two popular procedures for vertebral fractures, kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty, experienced no more relief than those receiving a sham procedure. Besides being ineffective, these procedures carry considerable risks. Nevertheless, Medicare pays for 100,000 of these procedures a year, at a cost of around $1 billion.• Multiple clinical trials have shown that cardiac stents are no more effective than drugs or lifestyle changes in preventing heart attacks or death. Although some studies have shown that stents provide short-term relief of chest pain, up to 30 percent of patients receiving stents have no chest pain to begin with, and thus derive no more benefit from this invasive procedure than from equally effective and far less expensive medicines. Risks associated with stent implantation, meanwhile, include exposure to radiation and to dyes that can damage the kidneys, and in rare cases, death from the stent itself. Yet one study estimated that Medicare spends $1.6 billion on drug-coated stents (the most common type of cardiac stents) annually.• A recent study found that one-fifth of all implantable cardiac defibrillators were placed in patients who, according to clinical guidelines, will not benefit from them. But Medicare pays for them anyway, at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 per device implantation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 It's all free. Why not? When will government catch up with science? Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grim http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html " Shocking chasm between Medicare coverage and clinical evidence " By Schwitzer on May 27, 2011 9:52 AM | 1 Comment | No TrackBacksThat's a phrase used by Rita F. Redberg, MD, University of California San Francisco cardiologist and the editor ofArchives of Internal Medicine, in her New York Times opinion piece, " Squandern procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered. Examples abound:• Medicare pays for routine screening colonoscopies in patients over 75 even though the United States Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of experts financed by the Department of Health and Human Services, advises against them (and against any colonoscopies for patients over 85), because it takes at least eight years to realize any benefits from the procedure. Moreover, colonoscopies carry risks of serious complications (like perforations) and often lead to further unnecessary procedures (like biopsies). In 2009, Medicare paid doctors more than $100 million for nearly 550,000 screening colonoscopies; around 40 percent were for patients over 75.• The task force recommends against screening for prostate cancer in men 75 and older, and screening for cervical cancer in women 65 and older who have had a previous normal Pap smear, but Medicare spent more than $50 million in 2008 on such screenings, as well as additional money on unnecessary procedures that often follow.• Two recent randomized trials found that patients receiving two popular procedures for vertebral fractures, kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty, experienced no more relief than those receiving a sham procedure. Besides being ineffective, these procedures carry considerable risks. Nevertheless, Medicare pays for 100,000 of these procedures a year, at a cost of around $1 billion.• Multiple clinical trials have shown that cardiac stents are no more effective than drugs or lifestyle changes in preventing heart attacks or death. Although some studies have shown that stents provide short-term relief of chest pain, up to 30 percent of patients receiving stents have no chest pain to begin with, and thus derive no more benefit from this invasive procedure than from equally effective and far less expensive medicines. Risks associated with stent implantation, meanwhile, include exposure to radiation and to dyes that can damage the kidneys, and in rare cases, death from the stent itself. Yet one study estimated that Medicare spends $1.6 billion on drug-coated stents (the most common type of cardiac stents) annually.• A recent study found that one-fifth of all implantable cardiac defibrillators were placed in patients who, according to clinical guidelines, will not benefit from them. But Medicare pays for them anyway, at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 per device implantation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 When we get informed consumers who refuse unneeded tests for one.CE Grim MDIt's all free. Why not? When will government catch up with science? Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grimhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html"Shocking chasm between Medicare coverage and clinical evidence"By Schwitzer on May 27, 2011 9:52 AM | 1 Comment | No TrackBacksThat's a phrase used by Rita F. Redberg, MD, University of California San Francisco cardiologist and the editor ofArchives of Internal Medicine, in her New York Times opinion piece, "Squandern procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered. Examples abound:• Medicare pays for routine screening colonoscopies in patients over 75 even though the United States Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of experts financed by the Department of Health and Human Services, advises against them (and against any colonoscopies for patients over 85), because it takes at least eight years to realize any benefits from the procedure. Moreover, colonoscopies carry risks of serious complications (like perforations) and often lead to further unnecessary procedures (like biopsies). In 2009, Medicare paid doctors more than $100 million for nearly 550,000 screening colonoscopies; around 40 percent were for patients over 75.• The task force recommends against screening for prostate cancer in men 75 and older, and screening for cervical cancer in women 65 and older who have had a previous normal Pap smear, but Medicare spent more than $50 million in 2008 on such screenings, as well as additional money on unnecessary procedures that often follow.• Two recent randomized trials found that patients receiving two popular procedures for vertebral fractures, kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty, experienced no more relief than those receiving a sham procedure. Besides being ineffective, these procedures carry considerable risks. Nevertheless, Medicare pays for 100,000 of these procedures a year, at a cost of around $1 billion.• Multiple clinical trials have shown that cardiac stents are no more effective than drugs or lifestyle changes in preventing heart attacks or death. Although some studies have shown that stents provide short-term relief of chest pain, up to 30 percent of patients receiving stents have no chest pain to begin with, and thus derive no more benefit from this invasive procedure than from equally effective and far less expensive medicines. Risks associated with stent implantation, meanwhile, include exposure to radiation and to dyes that can damage the kidneys, and in rare cases, death from the stent itself. Yet one study estimated that Medicare spends $1.6 billion on drug-coated stents (the most common type of cardiac stents) annually.• A recent study found that one-fifth of all implantable cardiac defibrillators were placed in patients who, according to clinical guidelines, will not benefit from them. But Medicare pays for them anyway, at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 per device implantation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2011 Report Share Posted June 4, 2011 As long as everything is free, that will not happen. Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence GrimSent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 10:00 PMTo: hyperaldosteronism Subject: Re: Medicare and costs When we get informed consumers who refuse unneeded tests for one. CE Grim MD It's all free. Why not? When will government catch up with science? Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grimhttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html " Shocking chasm between Medicare coverage and clinical evidence " By Schwitzer on May 27, 2011 9:52 AM | 1 Comment | No TrackBacksThat's a phrase used by Rita F. Redberg, MD, University of California San Francisco cardiologist and the editor ofArchives of Internal Medicine, in her New York Times opinion piece, " Squandern procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered. Examples abound:• Medicare pays for routine screening colonoscopies in patients over 75 even though the United States Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of experts financed by the Department of Health and Human Services, advises against them (and against any colonoscopies for patients over 85), because it takes at least eight years to realize any benefits from the procedure. Moreover, colonoscopies carry risks of serious complications (like perforations) and often lead to further unnecessary procedures (like biopsies). In 2009, Medicare paid doctors more than $100 million for nearly 550,000 screening colonoscopies; around 40 percent were for patients over 75.• The task force recommends against screening for prostate cancer in men 75 and older, and screening for cervical cancer in women 65 and older who have had a previous normal Pap smear, but Medicare spent more than $50 million in 2008 on such screenings, as well as additional money on unnecessary procedures that often follow.• Two recent randomized trials found that patients receiving two popular procedures for vertebral fractures, kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty, experienced no more relief than those receiving a sham procedure. Besides being ineffective, these procedures carry considerable risks. Nevertheless, Medicare pays for 100,000 of these procedures a year, at a cost of around $1 billion.• Multiple clinical trials have shown that cardiac stents are no more effective than drugs or lifestyle changes in preventing heart attacks or death. Although some studies have shown that stents provide short-term relief of chest pain, up to 30 percent of patients receiving stents have no chest pain to begin with, and thus derive no more benefit from this invasive procedure than from equally effective and far less expensive medicines. Risks associated with stent implantation, meanwhile, include exposure to radiation and to dyes that can damage the kidneys, and in rare cases, death from the stent itself. Yet one study estimated that Medicare spends $1.6 billion on drug-coated stents (the most common type of cardiac stents) annually.• A recent study found that one-fifth of all implantable cardiac defibrillators were placed in patients who, according to clinical guidelines, will not benefit from them. But Medicare pays for them anyway, at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 per device implantation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2011 Report Share Posted June 5, 2011 Not really free as medicare is a 80 20 plan > > It's all free. Why not? When will government catch up with science? > > Val > > From: hyperaldosteronism > [mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grim > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html > > > " Shocking chasm between Medicare coverage and clinical evidence " > > By Schwitzer on May 27, 2011 9:52 AM | > <http://www.healthnewsreview.org/blog/2011/05/shocking-chasm-between-medicar > e-coverage-and-clinical-evidence.html#comments> 1 Comment | > <http://www.healthnewsreview.org/blog/2011/05/shocking-chasm-between-medicar > e-coverage-and-clinical-evidence.html#trackbacks> No TrackBacks > That's a phrase used by Rita F. Redberg, MD, University of California San > Francisco cardiologist and the editor ofArchives of Internal Medicine, in > her New York Times opinion piece, " > <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html> Squandern > procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered. Examples > abound: > > . Medicare pays for routine screening colonoscopies in patients over 75 even > though the United States Preventive Services Task Force, an independent > panel of experts financed by the Department of Health and Human Services, > advises against them (and against any colonoscopies for patients over 85), > because it takes at least eight years to realize any benefits from the > procedure. Moreover, colonoscopies carry risks of serious complications > (like perforations) and often lead to further unnecessary procedures (like > biopsies). In 2009, Medicare paid doctors more than $100 million for nearly > 550,000 screening colonoscopies; around 40 percent were for patients over > 75. > . The task force recommends against screening for prostate cancer in men 75 > and older, and screening for cervical cancer in women 65 and older who have > had a previous normal Pap smear, but Medicare spent more than $50 million in > 2008 on such screenings, as well as additional money on unnecessary > procedures that often follow. > . Two recent randomized trials found that patients receiving two popular > procedures for vertebral fractures, kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty, > experienced no more relief than those receiving a sham procedure. Besides > being ineffective, these procedures carry considerable risks. Nevertheless, > Medicare pays for 100,000 of these procedures a year, at a cost of around $1 > billion. > . Multiple clinical trials have shown that cardiac stents are no more > effective than drugs or lifestyle changes in preventing heart attacks or > death. Although some studies have shown that stents provide short-term > relief of chest pain, up to 30 percent of patients receiving stents have no > chest pain to begin with, and thus derive no more benefit from this invasive > procedure than from equally effective and far less expensive medicines. > Risks associated with stent implantation, meanwhile, include exposure to > radiation and to dyes that can damage the kidneys, and in rare cases, death > from the stent itself. Yet one study estimated that Medicare spends $1.6 > billion on drug-coated stents (the most common type of cardiac stents) > annually. > . A recent study found that one-fifth of all implantable cardiac > defibrillators were placed in patients who, according to clinical > guidelines, will not benefit from them. But Medicare pays for them anyway, > at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 per device implantation. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.