Medical technology has become a controversial national policy issue, largely because of rapidly rising national health expenditures and their relation to medical technology. These costs are increasingly viewed in relation to benefits or effectiveness. Attempts to control medical technology, to consider benefits in relation to costs, have largely been regulatory, and have failed to ameliorate cost rises. This failure has stimulated consideration of the reimbursement system as a controlling device. The Medicare program already has developed a rather formal process for making reimbursement decisions based on technology assessments. However, fundamental reform of the reimbursement system seems necessary to counter perverse incentives built into payment. Recent proposals to shift to prospective payment is an example of such a change. However, the basically private nature of the health care system and the limited leverage of the Medicare program limits the power of the federal government to make change.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. John Kenneth Galbraith, The New Industrial State (New York: New American Library, 1977), p. 31.
2.
2. U.S., Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Medical Technologies, GPO stock no. 052-003-00593-0 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1978), p. xii.
3.
3. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Health U.S. 1981, DHHS pub. no. (PHS) 82-1232 (Hyattsville, MD: DHHS, 1981), p. 195, Table 60.
4.
4. Stuart Altman and Robert Blendon, eds., Medical Technology: The Culprit behind Health Care Costs (Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Services Research and Bureau of Health Planning, 1979), pp. 27-30.
5.
see also H. Fineberg and H. Hiatt, “Evaluation of Medical Practices,”New England Journal of Medicine, 301(20):1986 (15 Nov. 1979).
6.
6. OTA, Strategies for Medical Technology Assessment, pp. 91 ff.
7.
7. Louise B. Russell, Technology in Hospitals: Medical Advances and Their Diffusion (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1979), p. 4.
8.
8. President's Biomedical Research Panel, Report, DHEW pub. no. (OS) 76-500 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1976), p. 7.
9.
9. Health U.S. 1981, p. 215, Table 78.
10.
10. Everett M. Rogers and Floyd Shoemaker, Communication of Innovations: A Cross-Cultural Approach (New York: Free Press, 1971), p. 100.
11.
see also Kenneth E. Warner, “Treatment Decision-Making in Catastrophic Illness, Medical Care, 15:19 (1977).
12.
12. U.S., Congress, OTA, Development of Medical Technology: Opportunities for Assessment, GPO stock no. 052-003-00217-5 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1976), p. 76; see also Russell, Technology in Hospitals, pp. 41 ff.
13.
13. Kenneth E. Warner, “A `Desperation-Reaction' Model of Medical Diffusion,”Health Services Research, 10:369 (1975).
14.
14. Renee C. Fox, “The Human Condition of Health Professionals” (Lecture presented at the University of New Hampshire, 1979).
15.
15. Arnold Kaluzny, Diana Barhyte, and George C. Reader, “Health Systems,” in The Diffusion of Medical Technology, ed. Gerald Gordon and G. Lawrence Fisher (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1975), p. 29.
16.
16. Christian P. Tanon and Everett M. Rogers, “Diffusion Research Methodology: Focus on Health Care Organizations,” in ibid., p. 51.
17.
17. H. Dowling, Medicines for Man (New York: Knopf, 1970), p. 174.
18.
18. Tanon and Rogers, “Diffusion Research Methodology.”
19.
19. Ann L. Greer, “Advances in the Study of Diffusion and Innovation in Health Care Organizations,”Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly/Health and Society, 55:505 (1977).
20.
20. C. Perrow, “Hospitals: Technology, Structure, and Goals,” in Handbook for Organizations, ed. J. March (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965).
21.
21. Ibid.
22.
22. Ann L. Greer, “Deus ex Machina: Physicians in the Adoption of Hospital Medical Technology” (Unpublished manuscript, Urban Research Center, Milwaukee, WI, 1981).
23.
23. Gordon and Fisher, eds., Diffusion of Medical Technology.
24.
24. Committee on Technology and Health Care, Medical Technology and the Health Care System (Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1979); see also Russell, Technology in Hospitals.
25.
25. Jonathan A. Showstack, Steven A. Schroeder, and Howard R. Steinberg, “Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of a Diagnostic Technology: The Case of Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy,”Medical Care, 19(5): 498 (May 1981).
26.
26. Leonard G. Schifrin and Jack R. Tayan, “The Drug Lag: An Interpretive Review of the Literature,”International Journal of Health Services, 7:359 (1977).
27.
27. David S. Salkever and Thomas W. Bice, “The Impact of Certificate-of-Need Controls on Hospital Investment,”Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly/Health and Society, 54:185 (1976).
28.
28. Jerry Cromwellet al., Incentives and Decisions Underlying Hospitals' Adoption and Utilization of Major Capital Equipment (Boston, MA: Abt Associates, 1975).
29.
29. U.S., Congress, OTA, Policy Implications of the Computed Tomography (CT) Scanner: An Update (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1981).
30.
30. H. David Banta, Clyde J. Behney, and Jane Sisk Willems, Toward Rational Technology in Medicine (New York: Springer, 1981), p. 88.
31.
see also William L. Dowlinget al., Prospective Reimbursement in Downstate New York and Its Impact in Hospitals—A Summary (Seattle: University of Washington, 1976).
32.
32. Jerry Cromwell and James Kanak, “The Effects of Prospective Reimbursement Programs on Hospital Adoption and Service Sharing,”Health Care Financing Review, 4(2):67 (Dec. 1982).
33.
33. Judith L. Wagneret al., A Study of the Impact of Reimbursement Strategies on the Diffusion of Medical Technologies (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1982), pp. 6-8.
34.
34. Milton Roemer and Max Shain, Hospital Utilization under Insurance (Chicago: American Hospital Association, 1959).
35.
35. OTA, Development of Medical Technology: Opportunities for Assessment.
36.
36. Cromwellet al., Incentives and Decisions.
37.
37. Russell, Technology in Hospitals.
38.
38. John E. Wennberg and Alan Gittelsohn, “Health Care Delivery in Maine, Patterns of Use of Common Surgical Procedures,”Journal of the Maine Medical Association, 66:123 (May 1975).
39.
39. Eliot Freidson, Profession of Medicine (New York: Dodd, Mead and Co., 1970).
40.
40. Kenneth E. Warner, “Effects of Hospital Cost Containment on the Development and Use of Medical Technology,”Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly/Health and Society, 56:187 (1978).
41.
41. Rosemary Stevens, American Medicine and the Public Interest (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1971).
42.
42. U.S., Congress, OTA, Forecasts of Physicians Supply and Requirements, GPO stock no. 052-003-00746-1 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1980).
43.
43. Russell S. Bell and John W. Loop, “The Utility and Futility of Radiographic Skull Examination for Trauma,”New England Journal of Medicine, 284:236 (1971).
44.
44. H. David Banta and Stephen Thacker, “Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Electronic Fetal Monitoring,”Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 34:627 (1979), supp.
45.
45. Helen Marieskind, An Evaluation of Cesarean Section in the United States (Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation/Health, 1979).
46.
46. Steven A. Schroeder and Jonathan A. Showstack, “Financial Incentives to Perform Medical Procedures and Laboratory Tests: Illustrative Models of Office Practice,”Medical Care, 16:189 (1978).
47.
47. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Report of the Secretary's Commission on Medical Malpractice (Washington, DC: DHEW, 1973).
48.
48. Milton Silverman and Philip R. Lee, Pills, Profits, and Politics (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1974).
49.
49. David Mechanic, “The Growth of Medical Technology and Bureaucracy: Implication for Medical Care,”Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly/Health and Society, 55:61 (1977).
50.
50. Steven A. Schroeder and Jonathan A. Showstack, “The Dynamics of Medical Technology Use: Analysis and Policy Options,” in Medical Technology: The Culprit behind Health Care Costs, ed. Altman and Blendon, p. 178.
51.
51. Michael Redisch, “Hospital Inflationary Mechanisms” (Paper presented at the Meeting of the Western Economic Association, Las Vegas, NV, 1974).
52.
52. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Health Services Administration, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Legislation, PSRO: An Evaluation of the Professional Standards Review Organizations (Washington, DC: DHEW, 1977); Department of Health and Human Services, Health Care Financing Administration, Professional Standards Review Organization 1979 Program Evaluation (Washington, DC: DHHS, 1980); Congressional Budget Office, The Effects of PSROs on Health Care Costs: Current Findings and Future Evaluations (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1979).
53.
53. A. L. Cochrane, Effectiveness and Efficiency (Abingdon, England: Burgess and Sons, 1972); see also OTA, Strategies for Medical Technology Assessment.
54.
54. OTA, Strategies for Medical Technology Assessment.
55.
55. Seymour Perry, “The Brief Life of the National Center for Health Care Technology,”New England Journal of Medicine, 307:1095 (24 Oct. 1982).
56.
56. Robert M. Gibson and Daniel R. Waldo, “National Health Expenditures, 1980,”Health Care Financing Review, 3(1):48 (Sept. 1981).
57.
57. Wendell E. Primus, “Financing Medicare through 1975,”National Journal, 1 May 1982, p. 789.
58.
58. U.S., Congress, OTA, Medical Technology under Proposals to Increase Competition in Health Care, GPO stock no. 052-003-00892-1 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1982).
59.
see also Richard S. Schweiker, Report to Congress: Hospital Prospective Payment for Medicare (Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services, 1982).
