I have zero medical expertise, but were the two blood tests and an xray really necessary for what seems like a simple case of dehydration?
Anecdotally, I recently got a simple blood test to keep an eye on something that’s been borderline in the past. Unbeknownst to me, my doctor ordered nearly 30 things to be checked in the blood panel, at $50-$100 a piece. Luckily my insurance negotiated a much lower price and covered most of it, but I can’t imagine paying $2,000+ just to check e.g. your cholesterol level.
I think the problem is alignment of incentives: for a doctor, over-testing has little to no negative consequences, but under-testing could lead to guilt due to a patient dying, loss of reputation because something was missed, lawsuits, etc.
As a society, is this how we should be using our limited medical resources? What if we made fewer xray machines and instead spent more on something like cancer screening? How many net lives could we save?
Anecdotally, I recently got a simple blood test to keep an eye on something that’s been borderline in the past. Unbeknownst to me, my doctor ordered nearly 30 things to be checked in the blood panel, at $50-$100 a piece. Luckily my insurance negotiated a much lower price and covered most of it, but I can’t imagine paying $2,000+ just to check e.g. your cholesterol level.
I think the problem is alignment of incentives: for a doctor, over-testing has little to no negative consequences, but under-testing could lead to guilt due to a patient dying, loss of reputation because something was missed, lawsuits, etc.
As a society, is this how we should be using our limited medical resources? What if we made fewer xray machines and instead spent more on something like cancer screening? How many net lives could we save?