These differences have been the focus of many investigations and publications. Noted experts Uwe E. Reinhardt, Gerald F. Anderson and at that time Ph.D. candidate Peter Hussey published a paper in Health Affairs 2004 examining differences in cost from an economic prospective. They focused on a number of factors, some of which cannot be changed (1-2) and others that could be addressed (3-5).
1) As nations’ GDP increases, the fraction of spending on health care also increases.
2) Because of the many opportunities in our large economy we have an increased cost of recruiting and keeping talented people in medicine.
3) In our present system there is greater market power in the supply side versus the demand side for health care. This is because we have a greatly fragmented payment system.
4) Because of the greater complexity of our medical system we have significantly greater administrative costs. These two factors, 3 & 4 could be addressed by creating a series of standardized insurance plans across the country (see link to policy paper on right hand margin- look under health care bank).
5) We have a practice of medicine that lacks discipline when weighing benefit to risk ratios, leading to much non-beneficial care along with the excessive use of technology. To address this need for a cultural change in the way we practice medicine I have suggested a timely physician and nurse support system and a dialogue between patient and physician as to what constitutes beneficial care (see policy paper (link in navigation bar on the right hand side, appropriate care committees and a new style of hospital admission form).
Additionally, superiority in physical diagnostic skills helps explain why physicians in the U.K. rely less on expensive diagnostic testing than their colleagues in the U.S. American medical students now have to demonstrate physician diagnostic skills before graduation. This is certainly progress in the right direction, but is it enough? I think not. Presently there is not an oral exam focusing on physical diagnosis after three years of an Internal Medicine residency; hence this expertise has disappeared. Dr. Abraham Verghese, Professor of the Theory and Practice of Medicine at Stanford University, comparing the physical diagnosis training of medical students in the U.S. versus that in the U.K., stated in The American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, 2009:
I have no doubt that if we attempted to put in place a standardized test using standardized and real patients, with examiners watching for technique as well as understanding of the methods of bedside examination, our students and residents would (much as they do in Canada and Britain) spend a lot more time mastering these skills…..I have great confidence in the clinical knowledge and patient management skills of our students and residents, but the area of bedside skills is in need of improvement, particularly if we are to practice cost-effective medicine and minimize a patient’s exposure to radiation. Imaging tests are valuable and often necessary, but if simple bedside skills make them unnecessary, then lack of such skills is not just costly, but dangerous.
I completely agree with Dr. Verghese. I along with most of my colleagues are concerned that presently most our Internal Medicine residents are not skilled in excellent physical diagnostic techniques. Certainly challenging these residents to learn superior physical diagnostic skills will not completely solve our problem of an exorbitantly expensive style of medicine; however, it would be a step forward for making our medical system less technologically dependent, more rational, safer and less expensive.