CBO and GAO both question whether the results Kessler and McClellan observed in hospitalized heart patients can be applied to patients in cancer wards, nursing homes, doctors' offices, maternity wards and elsewhere.
In 1999 a GAO study said the evidence Kessler and McClellan cited was too narrow to provide a basis for estimating overall costs of defensive medicine:
GAO: Because this study was focused on only one condition and on a hospital setting, it cannot be extrapolated to the larger practice of medicine. Given the limited evidence, reliable cost savings estimates cannot be developed.
And on Jan. 8, 2004 , the Congressional Budget Office also said the Kessler-McClellan study wasn't a valid basis for projecting total costs of defensive medicine.
CBO: When CBO applied the methods used in the study of Medicare patients hospitalized for two types of heart disease to a broader set of ailments, it found no evidence that restrictions on tort liability reduce medical spending. Moreover, using a different set of data, CBO found no statistically significant difference in per capita health care spending between states with and without limits on malpractice torts.
Worth noting: The nonpartisan CBO is now headed by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously was chief economist for President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers.
http://www.factcheck.org/article133.html...
no vanilla for me
Well I'm certain it would decrease the effectiveness of our health care system. Yes we need tort reform, it should be easier to sue quacks who do not do their jobs appropriately.
Mr. Wordy
Sure, and so will covering uninsured people who tend to tax the system greatly b/c the wait until the last minute to receive care and then end up needing expensive procedures. You and I pay for those people now in the form of high premiums.
IceT
Since the single largest expense for doctors is malpractice insurance yes tort reform would make a big difference in health care costs.
The other major change that could be made to health care to decrease cost would be for the government to get out of it! Right now the federal and state governments for mandates on the insurance companies all of these mandates cause the cost of insurance to go up. A mandate is when the government tells insurance companies that they have to cover certain things like, abortions, counseling, acupuncture etc. As the government adds these mandates the cost of insurance goes up. You can not buy basic health insurance which would be inexpensive and affordable for most people because of these mandates! We basically all have to by a high level of insurance thanks to the government!
Just think two major changes that would be easy and would affect the cost of health care and it would take $ 0 in tax payer money. This would be the cost neutral solution that Obama says he is looking for!
Smart Kat
Tort reform might, or might not help. But would it hurt? Isn't it a good idea to try more moderate measures like tort reform before going to socialized medicine?
And tort reform would only be a part of the equation.
Orignal From: will tort reform decrease health care costs?
Post a Comment