Health Technologies: cost analysis

Preventive care is recognized as the most effective strategy for health care cost reduction. Screening for early signs of heart disease, cancer, maintenance of diabetes and allergies and prevention of infectious diseases can be done without a supervising physician. Direct-to-consumer (DTC) laboratory testing allows individuals to order tests directly from a laboratory without going through their healthcare provider, and often at lower cost. The number of companies providing direct-to-consumer diagnostic testing is rapidly growing, along with the range of health information provided by these tests. Ancestry (genealogy) testing is an example. And so are new devices for cardiac monitoring.

Experts anticipate a near-term explosion in the DTC marketplace. DTC healthcare already was a US$700 billion industry in 2020, including over-the-counter drugs. The Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, PBC (MCCPDC) is nearing one million customers. An analysis of 2011-1019 records from Rock Health Digital Database, showed that 252 (21%) of 1214 digital health companies pursued a direct-to-consumer strategy. The pandemic has accelerated this growth. According to research by Deloitte, the number of people using virtual healthcare rose from 15% to 19% from 2019 to early 2020, then jumped to 28% in April 2020. On average, 80% were likely to have another virtual visit, even post COVID-19 and said they will use this type of care again. Latest data showed that consumers’ appetite for virtual health and digital health tools continued to steadily increased, although there was significant variation in physician adoption.

Human touch remains central to care delivery. In the 2022 Deloitte Survey of US Health Care Consumers, 70% of respondents who had a virtual visit in 2022 (vs. 67% in 2020) thought that the quality of virtual care was as good as in person, but only 73% (vs. 82% in 2020) thought they were able to connect with the clinician the same way they would in-person. Integration of data from patients' wearables and their self-reported outcomes into health records also experienced a setback.

The global market for Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) testing was predicted to grow from $1.4 billion in 2020 to $2.6 billion by 2025. There were cautionary cases of uBiome and Theranos, there are quackery labs, but as the industry matures and moves toward utilization of clear clinical metrics, and as the capabilities of technology advance, DTC testing will me more and more impactful. There are DTC companies that offer the tests and biometric screenings that a physician would typically order as part of a routine annual physical, such as a complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, urinalysis, and cardiovascular and diabetes risk assessment. Ultalabs, JasonHealth, discounted labs, drsays and privatemdlabs all allow to self-order laboratory tests and Quest and Labcorps locations.

No more uncomfortable questions for a blood test prescription. No doctor visit needed to gettest results - they will be emailed instead. Consumers pay up front and know exactly what they are paying for. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for many other healthcare services.

Genetic counseling for patients who are pursuing genetic testing in the absence of a medical indication, referred to as elective genomic testing (EGT), is becoming relatively common. More people are using technology to monitor their health, measure fitness, and order prescription refills. Before COVID-19, there was a slight decline in people who were willing to share their health data—but during the pandemic, new data showed that people are more comfortable sharing data during a crisis

REFERENCES

Cohen AB, Mathews SC, Dorsey ER, Bates DW, Safavi K. Direct-to-consumer digital health. The Lancet Digital Health. 2020 Apr 1;2(4):e163-5.

Stoffel M, Greene DN, Beal SG, Foley P, Killeen AA, Shafi H, Terrazas E. Direct-to-Consumer Testing for Routine Purposes. Clinical Chemistry. 2022 Sep;68(9):1121-7.

2022 Global health care sector outlook | Deloitte

deloitte-nl-healthcare-consumer-centered-future-of-health.pdf

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/lab/lab-test-market-shifting-from-provider-driven-to-consumer-driven.html

Teenagers love to spend, Health care consumers love to test.

Recent mammogram debate shows why reform will fail - most women don't like to get mammograms later in life and less frequently. Of course, this furious reaction is fueled by those who would face payment cuts if the new guidelines are implemented - radiologists, for example.

How many medical tests do you need to sleep sound at night knowing that you are healthy enough? Billions, trillions, googols?
How many out of a few thousand existing medical tests are redundant or irrelevant to individual consumers?

Mamograms and colonoscopies are perfect examples of overused diagnostic procedures. (see also the consumerreports article on overused tests and treatments).

Colonoscopy accounts for up to 75% of costs of an IBS patient, while the probability of it yielding meaningful results is less than 3%.
Citing Dr. Rex: Low-risk patients might undergo too many colonoscopies; high-risk patients, too few. When given a range of hypothetical findings on initial colonoscopy, most physicians would recommend repeat colonoscopy earlier than is indicated by the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force guidelines.

If 2000 women are screened regularly for 10 years, one will benefit from the screening, as she will avoid dying from breast cancer.10 healthy women, however, will have either a part of their breast or the whole breast removed. Even statistics deny that early screening for breast cancer saves lives.

Early and frequent screenings often lead to false alarms and unneeded biopsies, without substantially improving women's odds of survival. About 90 percent of abnormal mammogram findings are benign. A 2009 study in the British Medical Journal estimated that roughly one in three breast cancers detected by mammograms would never have caused harm. Earlier studies were suggesting this too, raising (along with harmful consequences of false positive results)

Perhaps the biggest problem with performing too many screening tests in healthy people is a phenomenon called over-diagnosis: Screening can detect slow-growing, harmless cancers that would never have killed you. But even if a mammogram "involves a tiny dose ofradiation", a biggerdose used in radiotherapy is harmful when given to healthy people. Breast cancer radiotherapy regimens can increase mortality from heart disease and lung cancer 10-20 years afterwards.

How often does this happen with breast cancer?

Dr. Kevin Pho, an internist in Nashua, N.H., thinks the rebellion indicates a larger problem with ObamaCare. "The fact that [the administration] is distancing itself from what I consider to be very robust guidelines portends a very poor future for comparative effectiveness," he says. "If they back down now, what's going to happen when a comparative effectiveness body says there's no difference between angioplasty and medical management of heart disease?"

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) has just revised their guidelines for Pap smears under some pressure. This resulted from an Annals of Internal Medicine article which documented that only 16.4% of gynecologists followed the College’s prior guidelines. Most did more screenings than indicated, the worst record of the specialties tested. But the ACOG still recommends that nearly all women obtain regular screening at intervals of 1-3 years.

Cervical cancer is a rare disease in the US: just over 11,000 cases are predicted in 2009. There will be nearly as many cases of testicular cancer, 8,400. In comparison both breast and prostate cancer are just under 200,000. Most women have been led to believe that cervical cancer is rampant and they need yearly screening to prevent it. Testicular cancer however, is rarely mentioned. Most physicians don’t even bother to recommend that young men self-examine.

Here is a different example. Man sues over “botched” testicular surgery. Doctors later discovered that the tumor was not malignant and did not need to be removed. Was it possible to offer a better testing, say biopsy? Urologists can tell you that testes should never be biopsied prior to removal if cancer is suspected as it significantly increases the risk of tumor dissemination. Studies show that those who had scrotal incisions for biopsy have a higher local recurrence rate as well as a higher relapse rate. If there is a solid growth in the testes, there is 95-97% probability of the growth being malignant. Sounds very reasonable, in this case doctors are sued for proper care, but was another cost - the cost of inconvenience, perhaps even mental trauma - ever taken into consideration?

Medicine is as much art as science – there are many cases where there are no “right” answers. Health care providers can prescribe as many procedures as they want and charge whatever they like. It's time for this to be changed.

Personal risk of cervical cancer, for example, can be easily estimated by every woman as it depends on whether she had multiple sexual partners, prior negative Paps, long term mutually monogamous relationship. HIV (that has a five times greater incidence than cervical cancer) tests are not administered to people without risks, right? Well, not quite right, but that's another story.

Dr. Joel Sherman (Medical Privacy, A Patient Oriented Discussion) has seen many women who are angry that the facts on cervical cancer have been hidden from them. They are pushed into getting Paps, but never told the pros and cons of screening. Never mentioned are the high incidence of abnormalities that resolve spontaneously, like negative biopsies and colposcopies.

And last, but not least - another reason of why healthcare is so costly - the insurer's overestimates, in a way their overdiagnosis of our health problems.

If the law says insurers have to treat every person the same, without taking into account whether they’re sick or healthy, young or old, a rational insurer will do some rational things. For example, it will assume disproportionate numbers of people who buy a policy from them will be sick and old. Of course, when they do this, the product becomes expensive, and young, healthy people start to wonder if they should even buy it in the first place. After all, they don’t really need insurance, right? Coupled with the overall rise in the cost of health care, insurers now push through new rounds of price increases, which, in turn, create more uninsured people. It is a very nasty cycle.

Aurametrix is developing decision support systems to help you evaluate personal health risks, decide on preventative measures, estimate cost/benefits of performing diagnostic tests. Better tools for a healthier world.

Saturday, September 17, 2022

The Rapid Expansion of DTC Healthcare

Monday, November 23, 2009

Healthcare: Is cost control possible?

Total Pageviews