Higher Medicare spending yields mixed bag for patients

Jan 08, 2008

Many recent studies have found that Medicare spending across the country varies greatly. But despite these spending differences, aggregate health outcomes tend to be the same no matter which region a person lives in. Because of this, some policy makers have determined that there is no value to the excess costs in high-spending areas.

A new study that focuses on colorectal cancer as a model suggests this is not correct. While it finds that patients in low spending areas ultimately fare just as well those in high spending areas, the authors find that all care is not alike.

“In certain cases the increased spending is beneficial,” says Harvard Medical School professor of health care policy Mary Beth Landrum, lead author on the study that will be published in the January/February issue of Health Affairs. “The focus should not simply be on cost containment, but rather on targeting care to the patients who we know will benefit.”

For this study, Landrum and colleagues Nancy Keating and Ellen Meara, also Harvard Medical School faculty, looked at a cohort of 55,549 patients, who were all diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 1992 and 1996, and who were all over age sixty-five and enrolled in Medicare. These patients lived in various locations throughout the US, in high-spending Medicare areas like Los Angeles and Detroit, low-spending areas such as Iowa, Seattle, and Utah, and more moderate spending areas like San Francisco and Connecticut. The authors analyzed various aspects of their cancer care, including mortality rates three years post diagnosis.

Although increased spending did not yield improved patient outcomes overall, the authors found that not all increased spending was necessarily wasteful.

“For example, chemotherapy for patients in stage 3 colorectal cancer is very helpful, and people in these high-spending areas receive it and greatly benefit from it,” says Landrum. “But in these high-spending areas doctors also tend to give chemotherapy in other cases where it might do more harm than good, such as with older and sicker patients. So it’s an example of spending money in cases where there’s little or no benefit.”

In other words, these results suggest that, when factored together, many of the benefits gained in high-spending areas are offset by an over-use of therapies with dubious beneficial results.

According to co-author Keating, “We can make Medicare far more cost-effective not by capping it, but by designing policies that reign in discretionary and nonrecommended therapies, while at the same time supporting all recommended care.”

Citation: Health Affairs, January/February, 2008, Volume 27, Number 1

Source: Harvard Medical School

Explore further: New toilets for India's poor, crime-hit village

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Scientists get set for simulated nuclear inspection

5 hours ago

Some 40 scientists and technicians from around the world will descend on Jordan in November to take part in a simulated on-site inspection of a suspected nuclear test site on the banks of the Dead Sea.

Alibaba IPO comes with unusual structure

5 hours ago

Foreigners who want to buy Alibaba Group shares in the Chinese e-commerce giant's U.S. public offering will need to get comfortable with an unusual business structure.

Recommended for you

Students' lunches from home fall short

2 hours ago

School lunch is a hot topic. Parents, administrators and policymakers are squaring off on federal guidelines requiring schools to serve healthier, more affordable and ecologically sustainable meals. No matter how they pan ...

US judge blocks enforcement of new abortion law

5 hours ago

A federal judge has temporarily blocked Louisiana from enforcing its restrictive new abortion law. But lawyers and advocates appeared to disagree about whether the judge's order affects doctors at all five abortion clinics ...

New toilets for India's poor, crime-hit village

Aug 31, 2014

More than 100 new toilets were unveiled Sunday in a poverty-stricken and scandal-hit village in northern India, where fearful and vulnerable women have long been forced to defecate in the open.

User comments : 0