Trouble in Paradigm: Problems and Perspectives on New Health Care Technologies, Essay Example

Not long ago, health care providers and insurers had high hopes for managed care.  The thinking was that competition would redress two chronic problems:  rampaging cost overruns and the quality of patient care.  Years later, and with a renewed fight over health care reform looming, it’s become clear that the existing system hasn’t worked as hoped (Sainfort & George, 2004).

Double-digit cost increases plague the industry.  Doctors are dumping patients of lesser means – because they can – and health insurance is simply unavailable to an increasing number of Americans.  Inefficiencies are, seemingly, built into the system.  Technology in the areas of genomics, nanotechnology, sensors and communication technology hold tremendous promise of advancing health care in terms of diagnosis and ongoing care.  Yet a poorly organized delivery system and the increase in chronic health problems among an aging American population have conspired to cause hoped-for advances to come up short of expectations (Sainfort, George, 2004).

Dr. Francois Sainfort and Dr. William George assessed the problem this way: “The healthcare delivery system in the United States is a highly complex system that is nonlinear, dynamic, and uncertain. The system is further complicated by a large number of agents and multiple stakeholders, each with multiple, sometimes conflicting, goals, aspirations, and objectives.  As a result, the entire system leads to a lack of accountability; it has frequently misaligned reward as well as incentive structures, and it suffers from inefficiencies embedded in multiple layers of processes (Sainfort, George, 2004).

America’s health care researchers and doctors have a well-deserved reputation when it comes to cutting-edge technological advancements.  Unfortunately, more is not necessarily better if the means are not available to implement new treatments and processes in an efficient and cost-effective manner.  Such has been the case in the U.S.

Technological Advances

The growth of genomics and sensor technologies has provided science with a litany of practical and potentially beneficial applications.  Genetic testing can predict individual risks for disease and determine a patient’s likely response to various drug therapies (Knoppers, 2007).

Sensors have multiple applications, ranging from superior imaging for surgery to long-term monitoring of the patient’s well-being.  In both cases, however, technological challenges include the “design of optimal, effective, flexible human-computer interfaces, as well as issues of privacy and security of information” (Sainfort, George, 2004).

Utilization of sensors are ubiquitous in health care, and are used from diagnosis through treatment and particularly when a patient is in a recovery situation or has adopted a lifestyle that requires constant monitoring (Demiris, Hensel, Skubic, Rantz,  2008).  The great benefit of genomics is in its ability to shape, to chart a treatment regimen that best fits the patient’s genetic predispositions.

Both of these technological advances are among a nearly overwhelming volume of “new healthcare science and technologies” (Sainfort, George, 2004).  New developments in these disciplines herald not only further advancements but also the near certainty that other new discoveries will only add to the technical complexities with which America’s health care delivery system can expect to be confronted.

Public Opinion

America’s essentially conservative political orientation has had a profound effect on genomics and genetic studies, as they impact health care.  The attitude of George W. Bush’s administration toward this science was stridently, even vehemently opposed to the very underpinnings of genetics.  When the political climate changed in 2008, previously unavailable opportunities reopened.  So the political climate is crucial here.

Privacy concerns impinge on genomics and on the employment of sensor technology.  Fears that disclosure of genetic information could lead to various kinds of discrimination are prevalent – in spite of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act.  Information sharing is at the core of genetics but worries about the dissemination of such data have been difficult to allay.  Negative impressions over the use of sensors are more overt.  Personal monitoring of any kind is a sensitive matter.  It is, by nature, intrusive and plays on the fears of people who already feel vulnerable (Demiris, Hensel, Skubic, Rantz, 2008).

There is no question that both technologies have aided medical science.  Yet both are vulnerable to, and can be impacted by, the political “bottom line” and ethical “norms” of the present day.  It can be argued that neither has been implemented to the extent that their promised potential for transforming patient care, at every stage, has been reached.  The problem is somewhat more far-reaching and transcends the effect of public opinion.  Practically speaking, bureaucratic roadblocks, communication problems at the provider level and endless wrangling over insurance and cost management continue to hamper efforts to introduce the results of valuable research into patient care.

Works Cited

Demiris, G., Hensel, B.K., Skubic, M., Rantz, M.  (2008).  Senior residents’ perceived need of and preferences for “smart home” sensor technologies.  In International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Knoppers, B.M. (2007).  Genomics and public health: legal and socio-ethical perspectives. Leiden, The Netherlands.

Sainfort, F., George, W. (2004).  Healthcare Delivery Systems in the United States. In Engineering Enterprise, Marietta, Ga.  Real World Operations Research.