In "The Great Recession Conspiracy", the point was made that the majority of healthcare expenses in the U.S. occur at the "end of life". A sensible approach to reducing healthcare costs would include Living Wills, DNRs, and consulting with health care professionals. Sorry to say, the Wicked Witch of the North screamed Death Panels and Obamacare has no significant measures to deal with this problem. The good news can be found in today's New York Times.
Care at the End of Life
Three years ago, at the height of the debate over health care reform,
there was an uproar over a voluntary provision that encouraged doctors
to discuss with Medicare patients the kinds of treatments they would
want as they neared the end of life. That thoughtful provision was left out of the final bill
after right-wing commentators and Republican politicians denounced it
falsely as a step toward euthanasia and “death panels.”
Fortunately, advance planning for end-of-life decisions has been going
on for years and is continuing to spread despite the demagogy on the
issue in 2009. There is good evidence that, done properly, it can
greatly increase the likelihood that patients will get the care they
really want. And, as a secondary benefit, their choices may help reduce
the cost of health care as well.
Many people sign living wills that specify the care they want as death
nears and powers of attorney that authorize relatives or trusted
surrogates to make decisions if they become incapacitated. Those
standard devices have been greatly improved in recent years by adding
medical orders signed by a doctor — known as Physician Orders for Life
Sustaining Treatment, or POLST
— to ensure that a patient’s wishes are followed, and not misplaced or
too vague for family members to be sure what a comatose patient would
want.
Fifteen states, including New York, have already enacted laws or
regulations to authorize use of these forms. Similar efforts are under
development in another 28 states. The laws generally allow medical
institutions to decide whether to offer the forms and always allow
patients and families to decide voluntarily whether to use them.
With these physician orders, the doctor, or in some states a nurse
practitioner or physician assistant, leads conversations with patients,
family members and surrogates to determine whether a patient with
advanced illness wants aggressive life-sustaining treatment, a limited
intervention or simply palliative or hospice care.
The health care professional then signs a single-page medical order
telling emergency medical personnel and other health care providers what
to do if the patient is incapacitated. In most states, the patient or
surrogate must also sign the medical order to indicate informed consent.
The orders are conspicuously highlighted in a patient’s electronic
medical record and follow patients from one setting to another — such as
a hospital emergency room or nursing home — so that any health
professional handling the case will know what interventions the patient
might want.
This comprehensive approach to end-of-life decisions started in Oregon
in the early 1990s and is now used voluntarily by virtually all hospices
and skilled nursing homes in that state. At least 50,000 Oregonians
with advanced illness are covered by orders signed by a nurse or doctor.
The program has provided care consistent with a patient’s wishes to
limit treatment more than 90 percent of the time and has significantly
reduced unwanted — and costly — hospitalizations, presumably reducing
the overall cost of care.
The Oregon model has been adopted by the Gundersen Lutheran Health System
in Wisconsin, where the forms now cover virtually all patients in
facilities for long-term care or hospice care. Families are pleased and
costs have come down. The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care,
which compares Medicare costs among various regions of the country,
found that, in 2010, Gundersen was among the lowest-cost hospitals in
the nation in treating patients at the end of life.
The Wisconsin Medical Society moved to organize voluntary pilot projects with doctors using Gundersen’s approach in other areas of the state. But the society backed down
from using the physicians’ order forms because of opposition from the
state’s Roman Catholic bishops, who contended that the orders might
raise the risk of euthanasia. As a result, the pilot projects will only
encourage healthy adults to do advance planning and create powers of
attorney well before they face a medical crisis.
No matter what the death-panel fearmongers say, end-of-life
conversations and medical orders detailing what care to provide increase
the confidence of patients that they will get the care they really
want. In some cases, that could well mean the request to be spared
costly tests, procedures and heroic measures that provide no real
medical benefit.
No comments:
Post a Comment