What We Know About Health Care Waste Isn’t True?

Louise Shiner writes,

geographic variation in health spending does not provide a useful way to examine the inefficiencies of our health system. States where Medicare spending is high are very different in multiple dimensions from states where Medicare spending is low, and thus it is difficult to isolate the effects of differences in health spending intensity from the effects of the differences in the underlying state characteristics. I show, for example, that previous findings about the relationships between health spending, the share of physicians who are general practitioners, and quality, are likely the result of omitted factors rather than the result of causal relationships

Russ Roberts often asks whether any empirical work in economics changes one’s mind. I would say that the Dartmouth studies changed my mind about health care spending in the U.S., convincing me that much of it is “wasted” (I prefer “spent on procedures with high costs and low benefits”). However, there have always been those who doubted the validity of those studies, and this appears to be a particularly strong critique.

On the other hand, see Austin Frakt’s overview of the literature.

1 thought on “What We Know About Health Care Waste Isn’t True?

  1. But this isn’t the geographic variation comparative analysis we were looking for, which is international, not interstate. And it isn’t for variation in medical spending per capita in general, it’s the variation in the price charged for the same treatments and procedures.

    What we really want to know is why a comparable developed country with high-quality health outcomes, well-paid medical professionals and similar track records can do the same procedures for so much less. A MRI costs +$1K in the US. In France it’s a quarter that. An appendectomy in the U.S. can be over $10K, some places $20K. In Japan it’s less than $4K, even privately procured. It’s not just India and Mexico that do medical tourism for Americans, even Spain has a thriving market.

    A difference of 20-50% isn’t too bad. A difference of a few hundred percent without any apparent bang for the extra bucks is what needs explanation.

Comments are closed.