On the success, cost and efficiency of modern medicine: an international comparison.

OBJECTIVE: To study the success and cost of modern medicine in industrialized, rich countries from 1980 to 1990. DESIGN: Cost per capita and per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) spent on health was related to: (i) mortality in six diseases amenable to treatment by modern medicine; (ii) the sum of those six diseases (avoidable disease); (iii) death due to other, unavoidable diseases; (iv) maternal and infant mortality; (v) life expectancy at birth; (vi) renal dialysis and transplantation rates. Efficiency was studied by comparing a country's avoidable mortality rates multiplied by expenses, to the mean for all countries. RESULTS: During the 10 years, avoidable death rate decreased 38% but unavoidable death rate only 10%. Life expectancy increased 3%. Cost per capita increased 107% but health expenditures, as per cent of GDP only 10%. There was a reasonable correlation between expenses and avoidable mortality but none between expenses and unavoidable death rate. In 1990 avoidable mortality was lowest in Canada, and highest in Japan. Cost was lowest in New Zealand, and highest in the USA. The efficiency index was highest for Australia, and lowest in the USA. CONCLUSION: Modern medicine as we have studied it is successful. Avoidable death rate shows a steep uninterrupted decline over the last 50 years while unavoidable death rate shows only small decreases. Cost as per cent of GDP has increased only moderately. There is a correlation between expenses and mortality from avoidable but not from unavoidable diseases, and a large variation in efficiency.

Choice of treatment improves quality of life. A study on patients undergoing dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QOL) is an important measure of the success of medicine. Choice of treatment is an important variable influencing QOL. We studied QOL in patients undergoing treatment for end-stage renal failure. Until June 1993 our patients needing dialysis could freely choose continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD); however, since that time most patients have been forced to undergo CAPD because the hemodialysis program is full. METHODS: We compared QOL in patients accepted before or after June 1993. Forty-five patients undergoing CAPD were studied during the period of choice compared with 44 who had no choice. Quality of life was studied by Bradburn Affect Scale, Mental Health Scale, Campbell Life Satisfaction, Perceived Health, Karnofsky Scale, Activity Scale, Physical Symptoms Scale, and desire for treatment change. RESULTS: The patients undergoing CAPD in the no-choice group had a lower score than the choice population in 4 of the 7 QOL scales. The Mental Health Scale mean score was 18.4 compared with 15.5, and the patients ranking highest on the Mental Health Scale decreased from 33% to 18%, while those ranking lowest increased 7-fold from 2% to 14% comparing choice with no-choice group. The Bradburn Affect Scale score was +0.7 in the choice group compared with -0.3 in the no-choice group. There were no differences in age, sex, race, or treatment that explained the difference. Influence of other time-related factors is unlikely as there were no similar lower scores with time in the QOL reported by patients in the in-center or assisted self-care hemodialysis or transplant groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once the freedom of choice of treatment is gone from the patients undergoing CAPD their psychological QOL deteriorates.

Sodium ramping in hemodialysis: a study of beneficial and adverse effects.

Sodium ramping has been introduced as a technique to decrease side effects occurring during hemodialysis. We studied sodium ramping in 414 dialysis sessions in 23 patients by randomizing 2-week blocks of dialysis to either steady dialysate sodium of 140 mEq/L, linear sodium ramping during dialysis from 155 mEq/L to 140 mEq/ L, or stepwise ramping (sodium of 155 mEq/L for 3 hours and 140 mEq/L for 1 hour). We studied the number and severity of hypotensive and hypertensive episodes. A hypotensive episode was defined as an abrupt decline of systolic blood pressure of more than 50 mm Hg, a decrease in blood pressure accompanied by symptoms requiring intervention, or systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg even without symptoms. A hypertensive episode was defined as a sudden increase in systolic blood pressure of over 30 mm Hg. We also recorded other side effects (headache, cramps, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, thirst, fatigue, weight gain, and blood pressure) during, immediately after, and between dialysis sessions. There was no major difference between the two ramping protocols, but compared with standard dialysis, both decreased total number of side effects from 4.0 to 3.0 (P = 0.057); the number of hypotensive episodes decreased from 1.3 to 0.7 (P = 0.036). The lowest blood pressure was 114/66 mm Hg during control and 123/69 mm Hg during ramping (P < 0.0001). The frequency of cramps during dialysis decreased from 0.9 to 0.5 (P = 0.006). There was no difference in headache, nausea, or vomiting. The number of hypertensive episodes increased from 0.045 to 0.086 during ramping (P = 0.125). Of 23 patients, only five (22%) had a marked decrease in symptoms; two of the three most symptomatic patients showed no significant improvement. Between dialysis sessions, patients complained of more fatigue and thirst (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0028, respectively), and interdialytic weight gain following ramping was 5.1% of body weight compared with 4.4% without ramping (P < 0.0001). Blood pressure also increased following ramping, from 143/79 mm Hg to 152/81 mm Hg (P = 0.001). Ramping can decrease the overall number of side effects, but increases interdialytic symptoms, weight gain, and hypertension. In most instances, it simply changes the time the side effects occur. Only 22% of patients have significant benefit. These patients can be identified only through trial and error, as no model of these patients can be created.