• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Technology
    • AI
    • History of Otolaryngology
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
    • SUO Corner
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

US Needs to Rethink Spending for Chronic Illnesses, Dartmouth Study Says

by Margot Fromer • September 1, 2006

  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

The report should end the more-is-better myth in health care, said Donald M. Berwick, MD, President and CEO of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. It also points to needed fundamental changes in the way the millions of chronically ill Americans are cared for. Whatever investment is made in their end-of-life care should be of the highest quality, the most useful, and most cost-effective—for instance, a better home health-care system.

You Might Also Like

  • Medicare Battle Heats Up: Geographic Disparities spark look into spending variation
  • A Look at National Health Spending
  • Dartmouth Atlas Takes Aim at Excess Utilization of Medical Resources
  • IPAB is Medicare’s New Hammer for Spending Accountability
Explore This Issue
September 2006

Dr. LaRosa said that the longer people live, the more medical resources they will consume. Thus preventive medicine doesn’t save money over the long run. “Nothing we do, no social policy anyone comes up with, will decrease health care costs over the next 20 years.”

The payment system needs to be changed as well, the Dartmouth researchers believe. The report notes that when payment is based solely on utilization, hospitals that reduce the number or length of stays lose money. The authors call for a reimbursement system that rewards rather than penalizes provider organizations that successfully reduce excessive use of services and that institute broader strategies for managing patients with chronic illness.

Extensive research has documented that greater use is associated with worse outcomes, poorer quality, and lower satisfaction with care. To this end, the report said, academic medical institutions and federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health need to define efficient clinical practices: whom to hospitalize, when to schedule a physician visit, and when to refer a patent to a medical specialist, home health agency, or hospice.

Dr. Munzer summed it up: “To bring about a change in physicians’ attitudes, we must reassess their motivation for entering the profession. We need physicians who not only have a head but also a heart.”

©2006 The Triological Society

Pages: 1 2 3 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Health Policy, Practice Management Tagged With: chronic illness, healthcare reform, Medicare, policy, Quality, spending, treatmentIssue: September 2006

You Might Also Like:

  • Medicare Battle Heats Up: Geographic Disparities spark look into spending variation
  • A Look at National Health Spending
  • Dartmouth Atlas Takes Aim at Excess Utilization of Medical Resources
  • IPAB is Medicare’s New Hammer for Spending Accountability

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Where should ENT publications draw the line on authors' use of generative AI?

View Results

Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Rhinology’s Persistent Gender Gap
  • The Example We Set: Thoughts on the End of Residency Training
  • Is the SLOR in Otolaryngology Residency Applications Contributing to Rural Disparities?
  • Applications Open for Resident Members of the ENTtoday Editorial Board: Deadline Extended
  • A Resident’s View of AI in Otolaryngology
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • History of the Cochlear Implant
    • Empty Nose Syndrome: Physiological, Psychological, or Perhaps a Little of Both?
    • ENTs Urged to Look Beyond Refractory Sinus Disease for Underlying Immune Deficiency
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?
    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment
    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name
    • ENTs Urged to Look Beyond Refractory Sinus Disease for Underlying Immune Deficiency
    • When a “Blocked Ear” Isn’t Obstructive ETD
    • What Does It Mean to Be Written by a Human?
    • Reevaluating the CMS 90-Day CPAP Adherence Requirement: Persistent Use Among Early Nonadherent Patients
    • Vocal Outcomes After COVR in Porcine Bilateral Vocal Fold Resection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2026 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939