Is the US health care system wasteful and inefficient? A review of the evidence

Sharon Glied, Adam Sacarny

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This review critically evaluates perspectives on waste in the US health care sector. The conventional discussion of waste is often imprecise and blames factors outside the purview of the health care system. Taking an economic perspective, we propose that productive inefficiency is a more tractable concept than waste. We then review the literature on the efficiency of health providers. We discuss the evidence on whether supply- and demand-side policies, such as value-based payment and cost sharing, can raise efficiency, finding that many of these policies have effects that are meaningful but small.We then turn to the literature on variations, where we argue that the body of evidence suggests there are large efficiency gaps, though these gaps are smaller than the initial eye-catching results that began this strand of research. Ultimately, these findings provide a potential roadmap for efficiency gains, a process in which a diverse array of policies compound, over time, to bring the US system closer to the efficiency frontier.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)739-765
Number of pages27
JournalJournal of Health Politics, Policy and Law
Volume43
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

Delivery of Health Care
Cost Sharing
Health Care Sector
Economics
Health
Research

Keywords

  • Efficiency
  • Health care
  • Variations
  • Waste

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Is the US health care system wasteful and inefficient? A review of the evidence. / Glied, Sharon; Sacarny, Adam.

In: Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, Vol. 43, No. 5, 01.10.2018, p. 739-765.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{17271f88c97a471aa67198c3401dd4bf,
title = "Is the US health care system wasteful and inefficient? A review of the evidence",
abstract = "This review critically evaluates perspectives on waste in the US health care sector. The conventional discussion of waste is often imprecise and blames factors outside the purview of the health care system. Taking an economic perspective, we propose that productive inefficiency is a more tractable concept than waste. We then review the literature on the efficiency of health providers. We discuss the evidence on whether supply- and demand-side policies, such as value-based payment and cost sharing, can raise efficiency, finding that many of these policies have effects that are meaningful but small.We then turn to the literature on variations, where we argue that the body of evidence suggests there are large efficiency gaps, though these gaps are smaller than the initial eye-catching results that began this strand of research. Ultimately, these findings provide a potential roadmap for efficiency gains, a process in which a diverse array of policies compound, over time, to bring the US system closer to the efficiency frontier.",
keywords = "Efficiency, Health care, Variations, Waste",
author = "Sharon Glied and Adam Sacarny",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1215/03616878-6951103",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "739--765",
journal = "Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law",
issn = "0361-6878",
publisher = "Duke University Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is the US health care system wasteful and inefficient? A review of the evidence

AU - Glied, Sharon

AU - Sacarny, Adam

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - This review critically evaluates perspectives on waste in the US health care sector. The conventional discussion of waste is often imprecise and blames factors outside the purview of the health care system. Taking an economic perspective, we propose that productive inefficiency is a more tractable concept than waste. We then review the literature on the efficiency of health providers. We discuss the evidence on whether supply- and demand-side policies, such as value-based payment and cost sharing, can raise efficiency, finding that many of these policies have effects that are meaningful but small.We then turn to the literature on variations, where we argue that the body of evidence suggests there are large efficiency gaps, though these gaps are smaller than the initial eye-catching results that began this strand of research. Ultimately, these findings provide a potential roadmap for efficiency gains, a process in which a diverse array of policies compound, over time, to bring the US system closer to the efficiency frontier.

AB - This review critically evaluates perspectives on waste in the US health care sector. The conventional discussion of waste is often imprecise and blames factors outside the purview of the health care system. Taking an economic perspective, we propose that productive inefficiency is a more tractable concept than waste. We then review the literature on the efficiency of health providers. We discuss the evidence on whether supply- and demand-side policies, such as value-based payment and cost sharing, can raise efficiency, finding that many of these policies have effects that are meaningful but small.We then turn to the literature on variations, where we argue that the body of evidence suggests there are large efficiency gaps, though these gaps are smaller than the initial eye-catching results that began this strand of research. Ultimately, these findings provide a potential roadmap for efficiency gains, a process in which a diverse array of policies compound, over time, to bring the US system closer to the efficiency frontier.

KW - Efficiency

KW - Health care

KW - Variations

KW - Waste

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053354766&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053354766&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1215/03616878-6951103

DO - 10.1215/03616878-6951103

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85053354766

VL - 43

SP - 739

EP - 765

JO - Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

JF - Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

SN - 0361-6878

IS - 5

ER -