Many
healthcare policymakers and analysts are focused on controlling rising
medical costs. Is attacking high-cost, low-benefit medical innovation a
solution? This column estimates that medical innovation – the use of
advanced diagnostic imaging, newer drugs, and higher-ranked physicians
– significantly increases life expectancy without raising medical
expenditures per capita.
The cost of medical care continues to rise rapidly in the US and other industrialised countries. According to a report
from consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, US employers who offer
health insurance coverage could see a 9% cost increase between 2009 and
2010, and their workers may face an even larger increase.
Some observers argue that rapidly increasing health care expenditure
is due, to an important extent, to medical innovation – the development
and use of new drugs, diagnostics, and procedures. For example, the
Kaiser Family Foundation (2007), citing Rettig (1994), claims that
“advances in medical technology have contributed to rising overall US
health care spending.”
Other observers argue that most medical innovations do not improve
people’s health. Lexchin (2004), for example, claims that “at best one
third of new drugs offer some additional clinical benefit and perhaps
as few as 3% are major therapeutic advances.”
If both of these claims were true, medical innovation would result
in the worst of both worlds – a large increase in cost and little or no
increase in benefit (in the form of improved health outcomes). However,
a study that I have recently performed casts considerable doubt on both
of these claims. My findings indicate that medical innovation has
yielded significant increases in life expectancy without increasing
medical expenditure.
My study (Lichtenberg 2009) examines the effect of the quality of
medical care, behavioural risk factors, and other variables on life
expectancy and medical expenditure using longitudinal state-level data.
As shown in Figure 1, the rate of increase of longevity has varied
considerably across US states since 1991.
Figure 1. Increase in life expectancy at birth 1991-2004, by state

I examined the effects of three different measures of the quality of
medical care. The first is the average quality of diagnostic imaging
procedures, defined as the fraction of procedures that are advanced
procedures. The second is the mean vintage (FDA approval year) of
outpatient and inpatient prescription drugs. The third is the average
quality of practicing physicians, defined as the fraction of physicians
that were trained at top-ranked medical schools.
I also examined the effects on longevity of three important
behavioural risk factors – obesity, smoking, and AIDS incidence – and
other variables – education, income, and health insurance coverage –
that might be expected to influence longevity growth. My econometric
approach controlled for the effects of unobserved factors that vary
across states but are relatively stable over time (e.g. climate and
environmental quality), and unobserved factors that change over time
but are invariant across states (e.g. changes in federal government
policies).
The gains from medical innovation
The indicators of the quality of diagnostic imaging procedures,
drugs, and physicians almost always had positive and statistically
significant effects on life expectancy. Life expectancy increased more
rapidly in states where (1) the fraction of Medicare diagnostic imaging
procedures that were advanced procedures increased more rapidly, (2)
the vintage of self- and provider-administered drugs increased more
rapidly, and (3) the quality of medical schools previously attended by
physicians increased more rapidly.
Between 1991 and 2004, life expectancy at birth increased 2.37
years. The estimates imply that, during this period, the increased use
of advanced imaging technology increased life expectancy by 0.62-0.71
years, use of newer outpatient prescription drugs increased life
expectancy by 0.96-1.26 years, and use of newer provider-administered
drugs increased life expectancy by 0.48-0.54 years. The decline in the
average quality of medical schools previously attended by physicians
reduced life expectancy by 0.28-0.47 years.
The availability of data from Australia’s universal health care
system, Medicare Australia, allowed me to provide some additional
evidence about the impact of advanced imaging technology on mortality.
I estimated difference-in-difference models of the effect of advanced
imaging innovation on age-specific mortality rates. Demographic groups
that had above-average increases in the number of advanced imaging
procedures per capita had above-average declines in mortality rates,
but changes in mortality rates were uncorrelated across demographic
groups with changes in the number of standard imaging procedures per
capita. Estimates of the effect of diagnostic imaging innovation on
longevity based on Australian data are quite consistent with estimates
based on US data.
The increased fraction of the population that was overweight or
obese, rising from 44% to 59%, reduced the increase in life expectancy
by .58-.68 years. The decline in the incidence of AIDS is estimated to
have increased life expectancy by .18-.20 years. The small decline in
smoking prevalence may have increased life expectancy by about 0.10
years.
Growth in life expectancy was uncorrelated across states with health
insurance coverage and education, and inversely correlated with per
capita income growth. The 19% increase in real per capita income is
estimated to have reduced life expectancy by .34-.43 years. The sum of
the contributions of all of the factors to the increase in life
expectancy is in the 0.85-1.32 year range. Consequently, between 1.05
and 1.52 years of the 2.37-year increase in life expectancy is
unexplained.
Greater coverage, lower costs
Although states with larger increases in the quality of diagnostic
procedures, drugs, and physicians had larger increases in life
expectancy, they did not have larger increases in per capita medical
expenditure. This may be the case because, while newer diagnostic
procedures and drugs are more expensive than their older counterparts,
they may reduce the need for costly additional medical treatment. The
absence of a correlation across states between medical innovation and
expenditure growth is inconsistent with the view that advances in
medical technology have contributed to rising overall US health care
spending. Increased health insurance coverage is associated with lower
growth in per capita medical expenditure. |