Interesting take over at the technology blog GigaOM (via Healthcare Economist).
Rapidly advancing technology is bringing sophisticated diagnostic tests, like genetic screening, to the masses. Many are undergoing these studies, without the benefit of rigorous data to ensure that there is a benefit.
We already know that unproven testing can lead to patient harm, in the form of false positives, unnecessary invasive testing, and patient anxiety. In addition, it can lead to a significant, possibly unneeded health care burden:
Thanks to technology, such diagnostics are now within the reach of consumers. As more people test themselves, doctors and insurers may face the additional burden of just-in-case surgery and a “previvor“ mentality. So, will technology cure health care, or kill it? . . .. . . Will widespread diagnostics increase the burden on healthcare? Somewhere between 10 and 50 percent of autopsies reveal diseases other than the one that killed the patient. If consumers test themselves, then tell their doctors, the medical system could wind up treating 50 percent more diseases than it does today “” even those that wouldn’t have killed the patient.
Related posts:
- AMA: Health information technology help for physicians
- Technology wonks try to fix health care
- Data entry in EMRs, and why doctors are slow to adopt information technology
- So health care is going to be a right . . .
- Reader take: Moral hazard, and whether patients should consider cost in their health care decisions
- Do patient demands drive up health care costs?
- Telling lies to your doctor, and how it can kill you
{ 1 comment }
I’d say the answer is: yes and no.
Genomic diagnostics will be a revolutionary game-changer in preventative medicine. Such technologies certainly would alter the deterministic landscape of inherited traits: if you know that you have a disease which might kill you, you can act on that knowledge. Most disease processes are detected too late.
Biomedical interventions will likely prolong higher quality of life and reduce the need for the crude chemical and mechanical interventions of traditional medicine.
So on those fronts, technology could ‘kill’ healthcare.
On the other hand, healthcare encompasses a lot more than just pathology. Technological advancement can create new opportunities for new diseases. Plus these technologies could be misused.
When ventilators and vasopressors first evolved, they held the promise of saving life. Over time, however, the use of these technologies has extended beyond their original purposes. That’s not necessarily bad, but it demonstrates that technological advancement isn’t linear or completely predictable.
Healthcare is probably a lot like Oatmeal: push away one glob of the bowl and another part slugs into the void.
Comments on this entry are closed.