If they're in the market for a new vacuum because the old one conked out, most shoppers will consider several models, compare features, try them out and maybe even read reviews.
But if they're in the market for surgery because a knee twisted on the basketball court, most health consumers will -- well, most of them will either go to the clinic where they're referred and see the doctor they're told to or rely on word-of-mouth from friends. And they'll pay whatever bill arrives in the mail.
That's because information about the quality and cost of medical care continues to be "preeminently unavailable," as author and University of Michigan professor Lawrence Velvel argues in recent writings, including his new book, "An Enemy of the People."
Patients aren't the only ones left "flying blind," Velvel points out, drawing from the Harvard study, "Redefining Health Care," and other sources. Doctors, specialists and insurers also "don't really know" whether one clinic is doing better than another or "whether a given surgeon is a disaster who loses a disproportionate number of patients."
The "differences in quality and results are staggering," Velvel wrote. "If we want to improve ... health care, it is essential [to] improve the amount of information that is publicly available about outcomes and costs."
ADVERTISEMENT
If Velvel's comments -- especially that last one -- sound familiar, it may be because they echo an opinion that emerged from the News Tribune editorial page's "First, Do No Harm" series, launched in December 2006.
Minnesotans need more medical information -- even if the state boasts being the first in the nation to require that "adverse events" be reported. Mistakes such as cutting off wrong body parts, leaving foreign objects inside surgery patients and performing operations on wrong patients are annually rounded up for public consideration. The reports also help medical professionals and the hospitals and clinics where they work pinpoint problem areas and take preventive action. The reports have led to improvements. Limbs to be amputated are marked in ink by the patient, for example.
Which is great, but missing from the reports continues to be specifics about how mistakes are made, who's responsible, and other critical information that could help consumers choose the best care.
Most doctors, nurses and medical professionals are excellent. But health care is an increasingly competitive industry with big bucks at stake. The more information made public, the better to encourage underperforming clinics and hospitals to improve while helping patients make better health-care decisions.
