Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Should Medicare pay for procedures that have no proven benefit?

Bob Doherty
Policy
September 18, 2011
149 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

“Doctors, with the consent of their patients, should be free to provide whatever care they agree is appropriate. But when the procedure arising from that judgment, however well intentioned, is not supported by evidence, the nation’s taxpayers should have no obligation to pay for it.”

So argues Dr. Rita Redberg, a cardiologist and professor of medicine at the University of California, in a provocative op-ed published in the New York Times. She writes that Medicare “spends a fortune each year on procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered” and offers the following examples.


“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.”

“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 . . . 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.”

If Dr. Redberg is correct that these interventions offer no benefit, why then does Medicare continue to pay for them? She offers several explanations: the contractors who process Medicare claims have no incentive to clamp down on unnecessary procedures, denying payment after a procedure is performed “invites the wrath of both patient and physician” and “our medical culture is such that if the choice is between doing a test and not doing one, it is considered better care to do the test.” (I would throw in defensive medicine as another factor.)

But for Medicare to pay only for care that is necessary and effective, as Dr. Redberg favors, more research will have to be done on the effectiveness of different treatments, and Congress would have to allow Medicare to use such evidence in making coverage determinations.

As a first step. the Affordable Care Act creates a new public-private institute to fund research on comparative effectiveness, but prohibits such research for being used to deny coverage based on cost or to “ration” care. Even so, some conservative lawmakers want to cut off government funding for the institute because they “do not believe that the government can rationally measure effective and ineffective treatments and steer funding away from the latter to the former.”

It is hard to see how the country can make progress to reduce Medicare costs when even a small first step get the evidence on what works and what doesn’t is under political attack, and when denying coverage “invites the wrath of both patient and physician.”

In the meantime, Medicare will continue to “squander” taxpayers’ money by obligating them to pay a fortune each year on procedures that have no proven benefit. If this isn’t the kind of government waste that should make the fiscal conservatives’ blood boil, I don’t know what is.

Bob Doherty is Senior Vice President of Governmental Affairs and Public Policy, American College of Physicians and blogs at The ACP Advocate Blog.

Submit a guest post and be heard on social media’s leading physician voice.

Prev

When professional courtesy could get physicians in trouble

September 18, 2011 Kevin 4
…
Next

You cannot treat a patient against his will

September 19, 2011 Kevin 8
…

Tagged as: Medicare, Public Health & Policy

Post navigation

< Previous Post
When professional courtesy could get physicians in trouble
Next Post >
You cannot treat a patient against his will

More by Bob Doherty

  • Don’t underestimate the appeal of a Trump “health plan”

    Bob Doherty
  • 5 health care lessons from the mid-term elections

    Bob Doherty
  • Medicare’s historic proposal to change how it pays physicians

    Bob Doherty

More in Policy

  • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

    Stella Cho
  • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

    Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN
  • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

    Mohammed Umer Waris, MD
  • Breaking down the barriers to effective bar-code medication administration

    Amy Dang Craft
  • The locums industry has a beef problem

    Aaron Morgenstein, MD
  • Canada’s health workers are sounding the alarm. We must act, now.

    Ivy Lynn Bourgeault, PhD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • What is driving physicians to the edge of despair?

      Edward T. Creagan, MD | Physician
    • Beyond the disease: the power of empathy in health care

      Nana Dadzie Ghansah, MD | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • The dark side of medicine: an urgent call to action against greed

      Don Gaede, MD | Physician
    • The surprising power of Play-Doh in pediatric care: How it’s bringing families together

      Alexander Rakowsky, MD | Conditions
    • Breaking free from gaslighting [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The pros and cons of using ChatGPT for your health care needs

      Liudmila Schafer, MD | Tech
    • Dr. Glaucomflecken for president!

      Aaron Morgenstein, MD & Amy Bissada, DO & Corinne Sundar Rao, MD | Physician
    • What is driving physicians to the edge of despair?

      Edward T. Creagan, MD | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 20 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • How Did Pulse Oximeters Perform in Black Kids?
  • Coffee and Heart Function; Ionizing Radiation and CVD
  • Health Inequity Should Be Labeled as a 'Never Event'
  • Healing the Damaged Nurse-Physician Dynamic
  • Doc Moms, Mind the Gap -- $3M Earning Difference by Sex

Meeting Coverage

  • Switch to IL-23 Blocker Yields Deep Responses in Recalcitrant Plaque Psoriasis
  • Biomarkers of Response With Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Cancer
  • At-Home Topical Therapy for Molluscum Contagiosum Gets High Marks
  • Outlook for Itchy Prurigo Nodularis Continues to Improve With IL-31 Antagonist
  • AAAAI President Shares Highlights From the 2023 Meeting
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • What is driving physicians to the edge of despair?

      Edward T. Creagan, MD | Physician
    • Beyond the disease: the power of empathy in health care

      Nana Dadzie Ghansah, MD | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • The dark side of medicine: an urgent call to action against greed

      Don Gaede, MD | Physician
    • The surprising power of Play-Doh in pediatric care: How it’s bringing families together

      Alexander Rakowsky, MD | Conditions
    • Breaking free from gaslighting [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The pros and cons of using ChatGPT for your health care needs

      Liudmila Schafer, MD | Tech
    • Dr. Glaucomflecken for president!

      Aaron Morgenstein, MD & Amy Bissada, DO & Corinne Sundar Rao, MD | Physician
    • What is driving physicians to the edge of despair?

      Edward T. Creagan, MD | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today iMedicalApps
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Should Medicare pay for procedures that have no proven benefit?
20 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...