A campaign to cut low-value clinical services has identified the top 5 based on cost, harm, and prevalence that can be targeted for reduction.
This article was collaboratively written by A. Mark Fendrick, MD, director of the Center for Value-Based Insurance Design (V-BID), and several V-BID Center staff.
As the future of the American healthcare system is debated in legislative chambers, classrooms, and living rooms across the country, one thing that almost everyone agrees upon is the need to cut costs while maintaining, or ideally improving, the quality of healthcare delivery.
The United States spends significantly more on healthcare, both per capita and as a percentage of the gross domestic product, than any other developed nation, yet fails to achieve commensurate health outcomes.1 One reason for this discrepancy between health spending and outcomes is the large amount—upwards of $200 billion a year according to experts—that the United States spends on low-value care that provides no additional health benefit and, in some instances, may even be harmful to patients.2
Though the substantial contribution that low-value care makes to US healthcare expenditures is not a new revelation, previous efforts to identify, quantify, and reduce the use of low-value clinical services have been met with challenges. Campaigns such as the Choosing Wisely initiative have called upon healthcare providers to identify low-value services, but without corresponding action by purchasers and other stakeholders, progress has been slow.
Building upon the lessons of the Choosing Wisely initiative, VBID Health’s Task Force on Low-Value Care has identified a top 5 list of low-value clinical services for purchasers to target for reduction. The selected services were chosen based on their association with harm, their cost, their prevalence, and the availability of concrete methods to reduce their use.3 The appears as:
These services—chosen with the tenants of clinical nuance in mind—offer little to no clinical value, expose patients to unnecessary harm, and collectively contribute to over $25 billion annually in wasteful health spending.3 In going beyond identification to also offer concrete ways in which purchasers can work to eliminate the top 5, this new VBID Health initiative has the potential to catalyze meaningful change in the treatment of low-value care. Whether through alternative payment models, network design, or coverage policies, it’s time to take action against the financial and health burden of low-value care.
To learn more, view the infographic below, read the Task Force on Low-Value Care’s press release, and visit the Low-Value Care initiative page on the V-BID Center website.
References
Eculizumab Biosimilar ABP 959 Demonstrates Similarity to Reference in Patients With PNH
December 6th 2023ABP 959, an eculizumab biosimilar in development, has demonstrated similar efficacy and pharmacokinetics to the reference product for patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), according to research at the 2023 American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting.
Read More
Humana Report Shows Benefits of Value-Based Care for Patients, Physicians
December 6th 2023Patients seen at value-based care clinics received more preventive screenings and had lower risks of hospitalization and emergency room visits, according to Humana’s 10th annual value-based care report.
Read More
Race/Ethnicity May Influence Local Recurrence in DCIS, Adjuvant Treatment
December 6th 2023Disparities in 10-year local recurrence following breast-conserving surgery were seen among women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated over a nearly 4-decade span at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, with Black women having the highest rate.
Read More