Academic journal article The Hastings Center Report

Health Reform: What's Prevention Got to Do with It?

Academic journal article The Hastings Center Report

Health Reform: What's Prevention Got to Do with It?

Article excerpt

A recent poll found that an overwhelming majority of Americans from across the political spectrum think prevention should be given priority in health reform. Given its intuitive appeal, that result is not surprising. Who could be against the idea of investing in keeping people healthy? But as it turns out, prevention has its detractors. The debate turns on questions about its exact meaning, whether it is cost-effective, and the complexity of the enterprise.

Like most Americans, I am a fan of prevention. My view of what prevention is, however, may not be widely shared. Prevention to my mind means assuring that all persons are able to live in safe, clean houses and neighborhoods; eat healthy foods; socialize with family and friends; get exercise; rest and manage stress. Prevention in this sense is "primary," in that it aims to prevent disease and promote health by creating social and environmental conditions associated with health and well-being. Primary prevention can be distinguished from "secondary" and "tertiary" prevention, although the divisions lack precision. Secondary prevention aims to detect early signs of disease through screening and other interventions to delay its onset or reduce its progression. And tertiary prevention is really management; it aims to reduce the severity of and complications associated with disease.

So, what flies under the banner of "prevention" involves a wide range of actors and activities that take place in a variety of settings, often with quite divergent assumptions and goals. This heterogeneity contributes to debate over whether prevention will save money, as so many politicians claim.

Few health interventions--whether aimed at prevention or treatment--save money. They are investments in a good that people value. Like education and clean air, health contributes to the well-being and productivity of individuals, communities, and society. Health interventions can, however, be cost-effective investments, and whether preventive interventions are cost-effective is a matter of debate. Steven Woolf, a physician and professor at Virginia Commonwealth University, and colleagues have argued that the cacophony of conflicting reports on the subject can be explained in part by technical variations among studies, such as whether costs are examined from a societal perspective or that of a particular sector (such as payers) or posit a short- or long-term time horizon. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.