<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Virtual Colonoscopy: A Window Into the Challenges of Health Care Reform</title>
	<atom:link href="http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/ruthfaden/virtual-colonoscopy-a-window-into-the-challenges-of-health-care-reform/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/ruthfaden/virtual-colonoscopy-a-window-into-the-challenges-of-health-care-reform/</link>
	<description>Commentary and opinion on cost control as part of health care reform from The Hastings Center</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:12:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Stan Elgart</title>
		<link>http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/ruthfaden/virtual-colonoscopy-a-window-into-the-challenges-of-health-care-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-101</link>
		<dc:creator>Stan Elgart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/?p=152#comment-101</guid>
		<description>Both points of view have merit, but the two most not considered appear to be the effectiveness of Virtual over invasive/patient preferences and cost.

Where exactly does the cost issue begin? The manufacturer of the equipment? The cost to the hospital to buy it or the costs to train health care pros to use it effectively?

It would seem to me that someone has to say &quot; sorry, this is too pricey.. bring your costs in line&quot;. Not everything can be given carte blanche to charge whatever and then suffer the insurance companies indignities of refusing to cover a procedure.
Where does this begin and enalbe health care costs to lower themselves.

New technologies have lowered consumer prices for cell phones, computers, tv&#039;s. Time now for the health care industry to follow suit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both points of view have merit, but the two most not considered appear to be the effectiveness of Virtual over invasive/patient preferences and cost.</p>
<p>Where exactly does the cost issue begin? The manufacturer of the equipment? The cost to the hospital to buy it or the costs to train health care pros to use it effectively?</p>
<p>It would seem to me that someone has to say &#8221; sorry, this is too pricey.. bring your costs in line&#8221;. Not everything can be given carte blanche to charge whatever and then suffer the insurance companies indignities of refusing to cover a procedure.<br />
Where does this begin and enalbe health care costs to lower themselves.</p>
<p>New technologies have lowered consumer prices for cell phones, computers, tv&#8217;s. Time now for the health care industry to follow suit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacqueline Fox</title>
		<link>http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/ruthfaden/virtual-colonoscopy-a-window-into-the-challenges-of-health-care-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacqueline Fox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 15:10:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/?p=152#comment-38</guid>
		<description>I think it is interesting that CMS assured people that cost was not the reason behind its coverage decision for the virtual colonoscopy. This excellent article then goes on to talk frankly about the issue of cost, including how it relates to this procedure. Not to endlessly beat this drum, but how much more trustworthy and useful would this decision have been to both patients and providers if CMS could openly discuss cost in the ways the authors of this piece do? Whatever the CMS decision-making process was, cost sits in the room with them and with everyone else, whether CMS and Congress acknowledge it or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it is interesting that CMS assured people that cost was not the reason behind its coverage decision for the virtual colonoscopy. This excellent article then goes on to talk frankly about the issue of cost, including how it relates to this procedure. Not to endlessly beat this drum, but how much more trustworthy and useful would this decision have been to both patients and providers if CMS could openly discuss cost in the ways the authors of this piece do? Whatever the CMS decision-making process was, cost sits in the room with them and with everyone else, whether CMS and Congress acknowledge it or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LindaB</title>
		<link>http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/ruthfaden/virtual-colonoscopy-a-window-into-the-challenges-of-health-care-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-37</link>
		<dc:creator>LindaB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthcarecostmonitor.thehastingscenter.org/?p=152#comment-37</guid>
		<description>Excellent article! One of arguments made by proponents of virtual colonoscopy was that it was less painful. But patients still have to drink the awful liquid prep, and there is usually no anaesthesia used with virtual, so there is some serious discomfort. Maybe the most disheartening aspect of the debate of all was the fact that lay Congresspeople got involved, with little knowledge of the scientific facts. We really do need a more independent body to make these kinds of decisions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent article! One of arguments made by proponents of virtual colonoscopy was that it was less painful. But patients still have to drink the awful liquid prep, and there is usually no anaesthesia used with virtual, so there is some serious discomfort. Maybe the most disheartening aspect of the debate of all was the fact that lay Congresspeople got involved, with little knowledge of the scientific facts. We really do need a more independent body to make these kinds of decisions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
