Screening arouses great passion, well greatish. Sticking to prostate cancer, there has been a back and forth argument for many years. There is no doubt that using prostate specific antigen testing detects many cancers; however the key question remains whether finding these cancers impacts survival. In other words, would many of these men die with rather than because of their prostate cancer. According to Wennberg, if 1000 men are screened for 10 years, 1 cancer will be found and treated successfully, 4 men will die of their cancer regardless and 50 men will be over-diagnosed and over-treated.
A study just published finds that over a 20 year period, there is no differnece in death rate form prostate cancer between those screened and unscreended.
Again, this points to the potential for reducing variation and reducing costs in healthcare.
Showing posts with label John Wennberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Wennberg. Show all posts
Monday, April 4, 2011
To screen or not to screen? That is the question.
Labels:
John Wennberg,
prostate,
screening
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Eliminate Variation, Part 2
A piece in the BMJ by John Wennberg summarizes much of the knowledge around variation in medical practice. He breaks unwanted variation into three categories, effective care, preference sensitive care and supply sensitive care.
- Effective care. This is care that is the right treatment for the vast majority of patients, and variation in this element relates to underuse, e.g. vaccination
- Preference Sensitive Care. This is care provided when there are more than one effective treatment, and choice of therapy should be dictated by patient preference; in fact, physician choice often determines this. Mastectomy rather than lumpectomy plus radiation for breast cancer for example.
- Supply sensitive care. This is care that is dependent on the supply of services in a region. Roehmers law is one example of this; this states that in an insured popualtion, a hosoital bed is a filled bed. Dartmouth have found no corrleation between the amount of care received and outcomes, suggesting that there are areas with massive overuse of resources. Gawande in a brilliant article two years ago examined this discrepancy.
Also check out the NHS health Atlas. There are huge variations in care evident. Likely that this occurs everywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)