Preventative care: benefits and implementation strategies

¶ … Care of Prevention

Preventive care is something of a buzzword in contemporary health care issues, particularly in the United States. There are a number of different parties that are propagating the notion to the American people that simply by focusing more on preventative measures, it is possible to achieve two things: lower spending on health care and achieving a more salutary population. Although such statements may resonate with voters when it is time for elections, a number of these claims are not necessarily corroborated by evidence-based measures, which reveal a more complicated situation.

When examining this issue which has been widely convoluted by conventional media outlets, it is important to define the term preventive care. Quite simply, preventive care is that which focuses on wellness and takes active measures to ensure that illness or physical maladies do not occur. It also involves measures to detect any sort of health issues as early as possible in order to treat them before they become more serious problems that require additional treatment and spending. Examples of this latter aspect of preventive measures include screenings for certain diseases and conditions. Other examples of preventive care include counseling and administering proper eating and exercise habits. Going for yearly physicals and engaging in blood work to detect any abnormalities constitutes preventive care as well. Interventions regarding tobacco use have proved particularly effective (Maciosek et al., 2006, p. 52).

In seeking to assess whether or not preventive care actually saves money in the health care sector it is important to realize that there are instances in which preventive care both can and cannot accomplish this objective. Firstly, there are a number of different preventive care measures which widely influences the amount of money spent on such care and that which is ultimately saved. Moreover, when analyzing this aspect of preventive care one must contrast any cost saving benefits it brings with those from utilizing curative measures. An article that contains a literary review of empirical evidence for the efficacy of both preventive measures and conventional treatment options finds that "the distribution of cost-effectiveness ratios for preventive measures and treatments are very similar -- in other words, opportunities for efficient investment in health care programs are roughly equal for prevention and treatment" (Cohen et al., 2008). The crux of the matter is the fact that in some instances such measures can save money, yet in others they do not. Instances in which preventive measures can certainly save money include preventing the use of tobacco products. Preventive measures can be extremely cost effective such as a parent or even an individual simply asserting that he or she will not use these products -- which can save considerable costs in maladies associated with these products including terminal ones. However, preventive measures will not save money in instances in which there are widespread applications, such as screenings for particular conditions, across a diverse range of populations with a diverse range of needs.

Preventive care can increase the total cost of healthcare in certain situations, while in others it can avoid such an occurrence from taking place. In many ways, determining the answer to this question is simply a determination of the inverse of the preceding question: does preventive care save money in the health care sector. The answer then to both of these questions is alluded to in the subsequent quotation which acknowledges the fact that, "some preventive measures are expensive given the health benefits they confer. In general, whether a particular preventive measure represents good value or poor value depends on factors such as the population targeted, with measures targeting higher risk populations typically being the most efficient" (Cohen et al., 2008). Targeted preventive measures include screening for certain diseases in populations where there is a confirmed and empirically-based high rate of incidence for it, such as screening for heart diseases in areas in which data indicates many people have some variation of this condition. Utilizing such a practice would not increase the total cost of health care in this area, since it would merely allow people to reduce the rate of incidence in which this diseases is manifest by detecting it earlier and giving people more time to treat it before it becomes more serious. Conversely, utilizing such a practice I an area in which there is not a high rate of incidence of this disease would increase the total cost of health care, since it would require people to pay for services that are not as necessary as certain other services are.