What to Consider Before Deciding

Intervention is frequently based on the medical and public perception and assumption that doing something is better than doing nothing. That is not always the case. There are times when the net benefits of all interventions are negative — that is, anything you do will make you worse off.  Rather than starting with the underlying philosophy, “You/We should be able to do something that will fix it” begin by asking what are the likely benefits and costs of each of the alternatives. Then chose the one where the net benefits — the benefits minus the costs — are likely to be the greatest. Take no action when that provides the best results.

When the patient/consumer is not paying for the service, he/she is placed in the position of not having to consider what they are giving up when having the procedure. When that happens they are more likely to elect to have more services than they would if they had to pay for them. Historically, that goes under the name “Moral hazard”. Moreover, the prescribing practitioner and the PhysicianFirm almost always benefit from the additional revenue they receive from providing those services. Often it is someone else, like an insurance company or the government, who ends up paying the bill. Continue reading “Should I Enter a Clinical Trial–Part Four” →