4 ms·
Couldn't it then be argued that the doctor is incentivized to give short simple treatments so he can work with more patients?
by CaveTech 13y ago
Couldn't it then be argued that the doctor is incentivized to give short simple treatments so he can work with more patients?
- gcb0 13y agoIneffective treatment is visible. The discussion is about cheap effective treatment vs expensive effective treatment.
- stonemetal 13y agoWhat would be wrong with that scenario? Shorter, simpler treatments sound like a win for both patient and doc. They wouldn't necessarily be cheaper than long, complicated treatments but on the whole they probably would be.
- CaveTech 13y agoBecause it doesn't imply that the treatment is successful. If I have a condition or disease it could be misdiagnosed as something much simpler and go unnoticed by me for years. Maybe it's not debilitating but that doesn't mean it can't be cured or managed better. When/how do these errors get caught? I'm sure many never are.
- stonemetal 13y agoA long, expensive treatment implies success? I would much rather my misdiagnosis cost 5 dollars than 5000.
- Ensorceled 13y agoSure. But then I'd incentivized to find a doctor who knows what he is doing. I'm ok with incentivizing less medicine rather than unneeded surgery :-P