There is a cost crisis in medicine: the healthcare industry accounts for about 18 percent of the GDP in the United States, and predictive models see this increasing in the coming years. This is a problem for the country as a whole as an estimated 41 percent of working Americans have some level of medical debt.
As many urban academic medical centers have become the world’s leaders in research and patient care, their bordering neighborhoods have suffered through decades of disinvestment and economic blight. Medical students often receive their first years of training in hospitals that serve these disadvantaged populations. While the current focus on social determinants of health represents a rising cornerstone of medical education, what else do medical students need to know about inner city poverty?
Daily labs are commonly ordered on hospitalized patients. While such tests may be indicated when patients are acutely ill and the clinical picture is unclear, there are many times when this is not the case.
With the rise of cheap and rapid gene sequencing techniques, personalized medicine has taken the spotlight in discussions about health care of the future. Personalized medicine describes the tailoring of medical treatment to fit the individual characteristics of each patient.
It has become more and more evident with time that the health care delivery system in the United States is riddled with issues, which have led to many disagreements about policy because there is no clear and universally acceptable solution to our problems.
With health care spending becoming an increasingly important topic, medical schools will have to find a way to integrate the fundamentals behind high value care earlier in the curriculum. Students should be familiar core economic principles and how they apply to health care before they are treating patients.
We are each entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. In his op-ed, Mr. Barsouk makes a number of statements that contradict the facts, eroding the credibility of his arguments. I hope to address the six most problematic statements here.
Our Health Policy student-leaders Aishwarya Rajagopalan and Adam Barsouk dissect the major policy changes of the ACA and the AHCA, offering their perspectives on the state of American health care.
On May 12, late-night personality Jimmy Kimmel gave a now famous emotional monologue about his newborn son’s health complications, concluding with a politicized message against Trump’s budget and health care reforms. Although Kimmel avoided directly implicating Republicans or Trump, he delivered his “heartfelt plea” immediately following the approval of the Republican American Health Care Act (AHCA), making it obvious whom Kimmel was really addressing.
We are a technology-obsessed society. Many of us most likely have experienced that disoriented feeling when accidentally leaving the house without our phone.
With the 2016 presidential election just days away, debates on the personalities and as well as the policy agendas of the respective candidates have become increasingly fierce. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton may both be moderates at heart, but their official policy platforms represent near-extremes of the political spectrum. This holds especially true in their proposals regarding healthcare: Trump’s proposal, entitled “Health Care Reform to Make America Great Again,” and Clinton’s, “Universal, Quality, Affordable Health Care for Everyone in America” together paint a picture of the spectrum of opinions and debates surrounding healthcare.
Health care providers and patients alike have been physically and emotionally frustrated when dealing with health care’s rising cost. Legislative restrictions based on cost often defy logic and common sense in a way that most people have never encountered. But, what is it specifically about the health care market that gives us these fundamentally perverse situations?