Technology and surgery. Dilemma of the gimmick, true advances, and cost effectiveness

Abstract

The key to evaluating a procedure in regard to a true advance versus a gimmick is to determine its value. This can be done only by physicians cognizant of a disease process. The value is determined by assessing a procedure's utilization, outcomes, and costs. Utilization allows early treatment and avoids neglected disease. Therefore, the appropriateness of the utilization can be determined only by an outcome study. An outcome study is another term for quality assessment. Outcomes deal with morbidity, mortality, and also the long- and short-term effects of the procedure on the disease. Overall, an increase of quality in a global perspective decreases the costs of the procedure to the health care community. Costs must remain secondary to outcomes. An attempt to decrease costs directly is a maneuver that, when applied by nonmedical individuals, will most likely decrease quality. When the quality can be maintained (as assessed only by a practitioner), then a decrease in global costs will increase value. The concept of increasing value by increasing quality without an attempt to decrease costs is a very important principle that the health care system must learn in our ever-challenging medical environment. Is a new procedure a gimmick or a true advance? The decision is made jointly by the stakeholders in our health care system--the patient, provider, payer, employer, and industry. If the procedure does not receive negative votes, then its adoption is almost assured. Comparing two procedures through these perspectives ultimately allows us to determine the potential for new procedures. A procedure not adopted through this method could be called a gimmick.