Jason Shafrin, over at the Healthcare Economist, brings up an interesting paper examining the data from the Dartmouth Atlas.
For those that are unfamiliar, the Dartmouth Atlas is a compendium of data examining Medicare spending per beneficiary, and then comparing that spending by geographic region.
The differences are stark. I know. I use the Dartmouth Atlas data in my health policy talks all the time. The data was highlighted in an Atul Gawande article in 2009 on McAllen, Texas.
Jason points us to an article from the New England Journal by Zuckerman...
“Unadjusted Medicare spending per beneficiary was 52% higher in geographic regions in the highest spending quintile than in regions in the lowest quintile. After adjustment for demographic and baseline health characteristics and changes in health status, the difference in spending between the highest and lowest quintiles was reduced to 33%. Health status accounted for 29% of the unadjusted geographic difference in per-beneficiary spending; additional adjustment for area-level dif ferences in the supply of medical resources did not further reduce the observed differences between the top and bottom quintiles.”
Now, sure, health status may reduce the difference in spending, but it doesn't completely eliminate it. In fact, I would argue that 33% is still a large difference, and one that still needs to be addressed. Comparing the spending in Florida to Minnesota PER beneficiary is quite startling indeed.
2 comments:
Nice to see information on health polices. I want to know more about it in present time.
eye lift
I would like you to keep up the good work.You know how to make your post understandable for most of the people.I will definitely share it with others.Thanks for sharing.
USMLE
Post a Comment