Pay-for-Performance Principles
Any “pay-for-performance” program should offer voluntary physician participation and foster the relationship between physician and patient, the American Medical Association asserted in a new set of principles for such programs. Such programs also should use accurate data and fair reporting, provide program incentives, and ensure quality of care, the AMA stated. If done improperly, “some so-called pay-for-performance programs are a lose-lose proposition for patients and their physicians with the only benefit accruing to health insurers,” AMA Secretary John H. Armstrong, M.D., said in a statement. Both private and public sector organizations have started offering incentive payments to physicians based on an appraisal of their performance. Before taking on such reforms, however, Congress should try to fix Medicare's flawed payment formula, according to recent AMA testimony.
Views on Physician-Assisted Suicide
More than half of physicians in a national survey say they believe it's ethical to assist a patient in committing suicide. Of the 1,000 physicians surveyed in the national poll, about 57% said it was ethical and 39% said it was unethical. In addition, 41% of the physicians surveyed would endorse the legalization of physician-assisted suicide under a wide variety of circumstances, while 30% support its legalization in a few cases and 29% oppose legalizing it in all cases. Although many physicians support physician-assisted suicide as a public policy, the results were mixed when it came to whether they would personally participate in an assisted suicide. About 46% said they would not assist a patient for any reason, 34% said they would assist a patient in a few cases, and 20% said they would assist under a wide variety of circumstances. The survey was conducted by HCD Research, a marketing and communications research company, and the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research.
Perceptions of the Drug Industry
Prescription drugs may be improving patients' lives, but 70% of 1,201 adults polled in a Kaiser Family Foundation survey thought the drug industry cared more about profits than people. Only 24% thought the companies were most concerned with developing new drugs that save lives and improve quality of life. People also blame drug companies for rising health care costs: Nearly 60% said prescription drugs increased overall medical costs because they were so expensive, compared with the 23% who said drugs lowered medical costs by reducing the need for expensive medical procedures and hospitalizations. In an earlier poll, Kaiser found that people were more likely to cite drug company profits than other causes as the major cost of rising health care. While not as popular as physicians or hospitals, drug companies were in fact viewed more favorably than oil or tobacco companies, according to the survey.
Cost of New Drug Benefit
National health care spending costs will remain stable over the next 10 years, although public programs will account for half of total spending, in part because of the new Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit, according to a report by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The agency claims that the drug benefit—which kicks in in January—is expected to “significantly” increase prescription drug use and reduce out-of-pocket spending for older patients without causing any major increase in the health care spending trend. However, the new benefit will result in a significant shift in funding from private payers and Medicaid to Medicare. Medicare spending is projected to grow almost 8% in 2004 and 8.5% in 2005, due to several changes in the program under the Medicare Modernization Act, such as positive physician updates and higher Medicare Advantage payment rates.
Clinical Trial Registry Legislation
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) have introduced legislation to require drug makers to register clinical trials about prescription medicines. The bill is similar to legislation Sen. Dodd introduced in the last Congress, but it stipulates that
Legislating Sex Education
Democrats in Congress are offering an alternative to the Bush Administration's proposal to spend $206 million on abstinence-only education. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) have introduced the Responsible Education About Life Act (H.R. 768) that would provide funding to states for programs that include information about both abstinence and contraception. The bill would create a grant program administered by the Health and Human Services Department that would award $206 million each year to states for comprehensive sex education. There are three federal programs that fund abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, but no federal funding currently exists specifically for comprehensive programs, according to Rep. Lee.